Why Does E=mc2 2009 Brian Cox
Came across a recommendation for this book and decided to pick it up. The author does a good job of explaining Einstein's famous equation; I am not
a physicist by any stretch of the imagination, but I found the explanations clear and easy to follow.
I did not realize how much James Maxwell had put into the the foundation of electro-magnetic theory for Einstein to build on (peaked my interest enough that I ordered a book about his work). That, plus a couple of axioms, a thought experiment, a bit of trig and algebra and ... voila! E=mc2! Well, maybe a tiny bit more than that ...
Interesting too how much scientists struggled with the idea of light being a constant speed at the end of the 1800's. And no wonder. Because that means that time ends up being relative.
The only point that I found that is not quite as clear as it could be is why light is squared and not E=mc. I had to do a bit of supplementary research to get that clear in my head (but that might just be me). It is really neat seeing how things all come together with E=mc2 and the formula for kinetic energy (which makes up a part ... a relatively small part ... of the total energy).
And the author explains in the last three chapters why this formula is so important.
Good book if you are interested in fundamental physics.
Came across a recommendation for this book and decided to pick it up. The author does a good job of explaining Einstein's famous equation; I am not
a physicist by any stretch of the imagination, but I found the explanations clear and easy to follow.
I did not realize how much James Maxwell had put into the the foundation of electro-magnetic theory for Einstein to build on (peaked my interest enough that I ordered a book about his work). That, plus a couple of axioms, a thought experiment, a bit of trig and algebra and ... voila! E=mc2! Well, maybe a tiny bit more than that ...
Interesting too how much scientists struggled with the idea of light being a constant speed at the end of the 1800's. And no wonder. Because that means that time ends up being relative.
The only point that I found that is not quite as clear as it could be is why light is squared and not E=mc. I had to do a bit of supplementary research to get that clear in my head (but that might just be me). It is really neat seeing how things all come together with E=mc2 and the formula for kinetic energy (which makes up a part ... a relatively small part ... of the total energy).
And the author explains in the last three chapters why this formula is so important.
Good book if you are interested in fundamental physics.