THE FAILURE OF EINSTEIN’S E=MC2
CHAN RASJID KAH CHEW 18 May 2017
[English with Chinese translation]

1. OPEN LETTER TO THE WORLD PHYSICS COMMUNITY

Dear scientists,

For almost a hundred years, Einstein’s formula E = mc2 (the fa-

mous energy mass equivalent equation) has been the cardinal equa-

tion of physics as it introduced the concept of total energy of matter;

all dynamics involves energy of particles and matter. The author has

discovered very recently (April 2016) that the formula E = mc2 is

invalid; energy is fictitious in the formula. The proof is simple and

involves no high mathematics.Any good high school students taking

physics as a subject could easily come to a definite understanding of

the analysis and decides for himself whether the author’s claim is cor-

rect; there is no need to rely on the words of any physics professor to

know whether the formula E = mc2 is valid or invalid. The author

has the relevant paper in his website:

"The Relativistic Mechanics of E=mc2 Fails",

http://www.emc2fails.com

The short paragraphs below are sufficient to convince any physics

students that the formula E = mc2 is invalid.

The formula for kinetic energy in classical Newtonian mechanics

is:K E

=

1 2

mv2

This

formula

is

derived

from

the

application

of

New-

ton’s second law together with the definition of momentum p as:p =

mv, where m=mass of particle with velocity v. Energy in classical

Newtonian mechanics is based on the definition of work(energy) =

f orce × distance. Newton’s second law is:

Force is proportional to the rate of change of mo-

mentum

d

dv

It gives force F as:F = (mv) = m × = ma. This is the well

dt

dt

known definition of force as mass times distance: F = ma. The unit

for force in the SI system is the newton (symbol N); with work =

f orce × distance, the unit for energy is the Joule (symbol J).

1

THE FAILURE OF EINSTEIN’S E=MC2

2

On the other hand, the formula E = mc2 is derived from Einstein’s special theory of relativity together with a new relativistic definition of momentum p as: p = √ mv , where m = rest mass, c=constant
1−v2/c2
speed of light. With a new definition of momentum, force in special relativity would be different from the classical mechanics definition of F = ma; it is now:

dp d mv

F= = (

)

(1)

dt dt 1 − v2/c2

As any physics students can see, equation (1) is different from the

rather simple F = ma. F = ma is the basis of the SI definition for

the unit of force, the newton N. There is no way equation (1) may be

used in any manner to define a unit of force. The truth is that special

relativity has no real unit for force; the physics community assumes

equation (1) too evaluates force also in the same units as with clas-

sical Newtonian mechanics - it does not. Only in classical Newtonian

mechanics that the SI unit of force, the newton N, may be used. The

relativistic force as defined in equation (1) evaluates to only a real

number with no association with any real unit of force. As force does

not have a real unit, so does work and energy in special relativity

have no real units. Energy in special relativity is only fictitious. The

formula E = mc2 is derived directly from equation (1) and therefore

energy in the formula, too, is fictitious (the only exception may be

when a particle is at rest where E = mc2 may apply).

All figures of energy in relativistic physics, including high energy

particle physics, is based on the fundamental formula E = mc2; when

energy is fictitious, all of particle physics breaks down. The European

Organization for Nuclear Research, CERN, that operates the Large

Hadron Collider (LHC) has purportedly accelerated protons to levels

of energy as high as 7 TeV (tera electron-volt, 1012). As the energy

was computed from the formula E = mc2, the figure was just a fic-

titious value. The only kinetic energy formula that computes energy

in

real

units

is

the

simple

classical

formula:

KE

=

1 2

mv2

.

With

this

formula, the proton’s energy within the LHC would only be about 470

MeV (106); the CERN’s reported figure being overstated by a factor of

15,000.

All of high energy particle physics fails.

2. 对物理学界的公开信：爱因斯坦的 E=MC2 物理学无效.
亲爱的科学家们， 近一百年来，爱因斯坦的公式E = mc2着名的能量质量等效方程） 一直是物理学的主要方程，因为它引入了物质总能量的概念; 所有动 力学都涉及粒子和物质的能量。 作者最近发现（2016年4月），公 式E = mc2无效; 能量在公式中是虚构的。 证明很简单，不涉及高数

THE FAILURE OF EINSTEIN’S E=MC2

3

学。 任何以物理学为主题的高中生，都可以轻而易举地了解证据，

如果作者的说法正确，可以自己决定; 没有必要依赖任何物理教授的

话来知道公式 E=mc 是有效还是无效。 作者在他的网站上有相关文

章：

E = mc2的相对论力学失败，

http://www.emc2fails.com

下面的短段足以说服任何物理学生的公式E = mc2无效。

经典牛顿力学中的动能公式为：K E

=

1 2

mv2

;

该公式来自牛顿第二

定律的应用以及动量p的定义：p = mv; 其中m =具有速度v的粒子质

量。经典牛顿力学中的能量基于以下定义：工作（能量）=力x距

离。 牛顿的第二定律是： 力量与动量变化率成比例。 它给出

力F：F

=

d dt

(mv)

=

m×

dv dt

=

ma;

这是众所周知的作为质量乘积

距离的力的定义：F = ma。 SI系统中的力单位是牛顿（符号N）; 与

工作=力x距离，能量的单位是焦耳（符号J）。

另一方面，公式E = mc2是从爱因斯坦的特殊相对论得出的，

动量的新的相对论定义如下：p = mv/ 1 − v/c; 其中 m=静止质

量，c=光的恒定速度。 有了动量的新定义，狭义相对论的力量与

F = ma 的经典定义不同;就是现在：

dp d mv

F= = (

)

(2)

dt dt 1 − v2/c2

任 何 物 理 学 学 生 都 可 以 看 到 ， 方 程 （2） 不 同 于 相 当 简 单 的F =

ma。 F = ma是 SI 系统对力的定义的基础，牛顿N.无法以任何方

式使用方程(2）来定义力单位。事实是狭义相对论没有真正的力量

单位;物理学学界只假设方程 (2）也是在牛顿力学的相同经典单位中

评估力 - 它不是。 只有在古典力学中，可以使用力单位牛顿N。方程

（2）中定义的相对论力量仅评估与任何实际的力单位无关的实数。

由于力量没有真正的单位，在狭义相对论中的工作和能量也没有真

正的单位。狭义相对论的能量只是虚构的。由公式E=mc2直接从等

式(2）得出，公式中的能量也是虚构的（唯一的例外可能是当粒子处

于静止时，E = mc2 可能适用）。

所有能量数字在相对论物理学中，包括高能粒子物理学，都是基

于公式 E = mc2;当能量是虚构的，所有的粒子物理学都会崩溃。 欧

洲核研究组织（CERN）运营大型强子对撞机（LHC），据称将质子

加速至高达7 TeV（tera电子伏特，1012）的能量水平。 由于能量是

从公式E = mc2计算的，这个数字只是一个虚构的值。 计算实际能

量的唯一动能公式是简单的经典公式：

KE

=

1 2

mv

2。

使用这个公

式，LHC内的质子能量将仅为470MeV（106）; CERN的报告数字被

夸大了15000 倍。

所有高能粒子物理是失败的。

作者:陈家钊拉希德.
E-mail address: chanrasjid@emc2fails.com URL: http://www.emc2fails.com

THE FAILURE OF EINSTEIN’S E=MC2

4

SINGAPORE