Of all the equations known to man I think Einsteinâ€™s equation of E equals m c squared to be one of the most famous. Now this article is nothing but an exercise in free writing and using the equation as a focus. I love the equation and what it means but I will not pretend to be a scientist or tell anyone that I see profound things within it, I am just using this as a simple exercise and seeing what comes up. Not having the ability to know whether the equation is in fact 100% true means only that I must accept it and think through what any of the implications are.

E equals m c squared

The energy that exists in a situation is exactly the same as the mass that exists multiplied by the square of the speed of light. Nice and simple, showing the relationship between mass and energy. It shows the enormous amounts of energy held within mass and that the two things are eternally connected.

But first some thoughts about equationsâ€¦

An equation is a beautiful construct in the mind, showing an exact relationship of a concept with others. It is like a universe in itself. An equation tells you many things by showing what is absent within it. In this instance there are three concepts that are related and nothing else. Energy, or the concept of energy in this instance, is nothing but a relationship between mass and the speed of light in an interesting form. There are no other factors involved in this mini universe, nothing else matters. The colour or shape of the mass, the speed at which the mass is moving, accelerating or resting has nothing to do with it. Energy is purely mass times this strange square of light.

It is in an equationâ€™s limits that you must hold the whole of a concept to bear. In this example, the equation is fundamental; it applies to absolutely everything that exists and nothing else. So no other information is of importance here, my typing of this article is displaying the use of this equation at work, because it exists everywhere at all times.

Looking at light, it is detailing a speed, not a velocity, a change in distance over time that is all. So the ideas of distance and time are involved in this relationship wrapped up totally, but in an interesting way. The square of the speed of light, not its cube or E equals m c. There is something fundamental about space that is wrapped up in here. Energy and mass seem wrapped up in the movement of something.

Isnâ€™t it strange that the whole of the universe is wrapped up in dependence of change? A maximum change, a fundamentally constant change, the speed of light is constant and all mass and energy that ever existed is eternally related to it. Interesting also that for energy and mass to exist at all the speed of light is squared, that two dimensions of space and two of time. Not three dimensions, three that we are familiar with, or even one of time, which we are comfortable thinking about, but two dimensions of each.

E / m = c squared

E / m = distance squared / time squared

The equation at any point holds this relationship between mass and energy. If energy increases, mass decreases, and so on in a perfectly reciprocal way, double the energy is the same as half the mass, for example. It also shows that neither can be zero, for if there is no mass then no energy can exist or vice versa. Does this means that there is no condition for mass not to exist, or energy not to exist? Both are intrinsically related in a form of mass-energy. So as space-time exists as a concept here it is equivalent in a sense to mass-energy, the concepts are both related. If mass tends to zero, then energy tends to infinity or on the other hand in an entropy sounding way, if mass tends to increase, energy tends to minimise. Is entropy another way of showing that the equation is in fact universally in motion and tending towards mass.

Of course the strange thing about the equation and the most significant part of the (the â€˜equalsâ€™) is that it requires energy to change it. Entropy enters into this mystery too. If energy is required to change the equation of some point to another then are we looking at a one way equation overall? Or is there some mechanism in quantum physics whereby mass comes into existence thereby creating the energy? IF that is so then we have to consider the definition of the universe and what it is â€“ for example in concept isnâ€™t it simply, everything?

Now the equation as a universe in itself shows that it includes the universe itself, it applies to everything within it. I know the equation is often used in a sense of a part of the universe, for example when you work out the energy locked up in decaying radioactive material, but it applies to the whole as well as the part. So we have a change in energy or mass in one part of the universe is absolutely related to a change in energy or mass in another part, meaning that there can be no separation of an event in one place to an event in another. It seems the universe is both a single point and infinity at the same time that the communication of change in one part of the universe has to be fulfilled in another. This in itself is an interesting point of exploration.

The curious bit to me is why time is squared at all, where we live in a universe of three dimensions of space and one of time. Is there a fault with that thinking? Is the concept wrong? Especially when thinking about the constancy of the speed of light. This part of the equation is not going to change, ever, in any part of the universe. So why then are they connected in such a fundamental way? What must be accepted in this equation is that the distance squared and time squared portion of the equation nothing can ever change, they are fixed in a curious way, whereas energy and mass appears freely to transform from one to the other because they are in a sense equivalent anyway.

Letâ€™s consider what is missing from this equation and think it through. I am missing? The â€˜Iâ€™ that is writing this is a concept that doesnâ€™t exist within the equation at first glance. However, the equation is universal, so â€˜Iâ€™ must, or itâ€™s truth in unfounded. So I am some part of the equation, existing as energy-mass within it with everything else. Any change in me, affects everything else and vice versa.

Randomly picking something out of existence and questioning the equation with it may actually sound absurd, but again, it is meant to be a fundamental equation after all. What of information where does that appear in this micro-universe of formulation? Is it outside of it and nothing to do with energy-mass or space-time? Is the universe missing something else? Does its existence impact upon it in any way at all?

The 20 minute timer has gone off but I feel I want to explore further, maybe another time J â€¦

I do remember playing with these ideas as a teenager, that information is in fact responsible for time and its direction, mainly because it does in fact need to be part of the equation as it occupies in part the idea of energy having a certain state, whereas the absence of information is another state. The difference thereby creating causalityâ€¦

There that was fun â€¦ much easier than writing product descriptions J