What is Digg?209 Comments
- inactive, on 07/14/2008, -62/+228fixed:
Einstein explains nothing, reiterates his famous formula deemed unfit for 'average minds' and then mentions 2 scientists from 1932 [in 57 seconds]. - brodieface, on 07/14/2008, -10/+162"Hey guys, Einstein here. This is, um, my first of many vlogs. Today I'm going to talk about my famous formula. Please remember to rate this video and subscribe to my channel. Thanks guys, love you heaps."
- Bmarofsky, on 07/14/2008, -3/+106damn my average mind!
- ThankTheCheese, on 07/14/2008, -3/+59Magic. Got it.
- inactive, on 07/13/2008, -8/+60Great find, Einstein was just amazing...
- lennybird, on 07/14/2008, -2/+45I believe he was just stating that it is often overlooked by the casual person. Who ponders mass and energy relationships on a daily basis?
- orlyfactor, on 07/14/2008, -2/+45Einstein set us up the bomb.
- MasterGrief, on 07/14/2008, -1/+38Never actually heard Einstein speak before. That was cool.
- ChoiceMad, on 07/14/2008, -20/+46Here is a great example for the people who always post "This is old!! Buried!" Just because it is old does not mean it is not interesting or that a great majority of people have already seen/read/heard it.
- e68895f, on 07/14/2008, -1/+25I'm more interested in Einstein explaining the smoke monster in lost....
- danman890, on 07/14/2008, -0/+19His twitter would just be complex equations
- brodieface, on 07/14/2008, -0/+18There are some holes in your proofs, guy.
- svendm, on 07/14/2008, -0/+17*****. He didn't say it was 'unfit for average minds'. He said that the concept of Energy and Mass being equivalent was 'unfamiliar' to the average mind.
Which is absolutely correct. Your average person does NOT go around thinking about mass and energy as the same thing. - BTraina, on 07/14/2008, -0/+17he explains the variables in the formula.
- cakerun, on 07/14/2008, -1/+18You mean that you don't?
- etherreal, on 07/14/2008, -1/+16Um, that is called the process of science. All current science is derivative of previous science. It takes the genius to put it all together.
- MikeSetera, on 07/14/2008, -4/+19I'm not your guy, buddy.
- jameshales, on 07/14/2008, -0/+13Nope. That's converting chemical potential energy into heat energy. Combustion is a chemical reaction, so mass is conserved (and thus no mass is converted).
- nickert0n, on 07/14/2008, -3/+15Get the ***** outa here traitor!
- MasterGrief, on 07/14/2008, -0/+12You have no chance make your time
- NanoStuff, on 07/14/2008, -0/+11Doesn't matter. Love that accent, dugg.
- dexter411, on 07/14/2008, -2/+13Any of the thousands of high energy physicists?
- borez, on 07/14/2008, -1/+11Well that clears that one up then.
- analogkid01, on 07/14/2008, -0/+9Any new technology is a double-edged sword. You need to worry less about mathematicians and scientists than you do about politicians and soldiers.
- Origin415, on 07/14/2008, -0/+9Already been done in the form of fusion/fission power plants (well not fusion quite yet).
A more simple way is simply to throw antiparticles at particles and watch the fireworks. Without copious amounts of antiparticles this won't solve any energy crisis, however. The medical imaging fields like it though. - hauntedchippy, on 07/14/2008, -0/+8Your average stoner?
Edit: ^ Also, that's Stephen Hawking ^ - Twaddle852, on 07/14/2008, -0/+8High school dog was my worst subject. I skipped AP dog entirely.
- jpjandrade, on 07/14/2008, -0/+8Actually, his equation is what nuclear power is all about. Fusion/fission is basically using E=mc² to our advantage, but we can only transform very small amounts of matter in to energy (as opposed to, say, a whole atom).
- Navicerts, on 07/14/2008, -2/+10One example is the A-bomb where a small amount of mass is converted into a large amount of energy. Another example is nuclear power.
The answer to our energy crisis is better solar power panels in my opinion. Of course that will be another temporary solution until we realize that our solar panels are absorbing all the energy the earth needs for reason "x" in 2500 AD. That's my optimistic idea of our future :) - eviljolly, on 07/14/2008, -1/+9Steven Hawking...
- hazri, on 07/14/2008, -1/+9Nerd
- Acglaphotis, on 07/14/2008, -1/+8He was the original mad scientist. The dude invented the nuclear bomb.
- fieserfettsack, on 07/14/2008, -0/+7They are not.
Einstein was born in Germany, Arnold in Austria. - oneoverzero, on 07/14/2008, -0/+7Ideas are electral impulses sent through the neurons in your brain, so in a sense, they have a mass and energy, which would be the mass and energy of the ions associated with the idea.
However, its not in any (non metaphorical) way free energy, or bullet proof. - mod4l, on 07/14/2008, -0/+6If you were to totally convert (annihilate) a mass M to energy, the amount of energy released is equal to MC^2, which is always a very, very large number.
The physical implications of this simple little equation are quite far-reaching, and go far beyond the development of fission bombs (which themselves only convert a small fraction of their actual mass into pure energy).
I majored in physics and I still think I have an 'average' mind in this world compared to these men. - jjb123, on 07/14/2008, -3/+9He's not your buddy, friend.
- sirhomer, on 07/14/2008, -0/+6@UnstableMind
Yes. Interestingly enough when you convert energy into mass you can only convert it to an equal amount of matter and anti-matter. This is one of the great mysteries of physics: how can there be such an imbalance of matter to anti-matter in the universe when it violates the fundamental physical property of symmetry, the same idea that forms the base of many of Newton's laws. - kingfoot, on 07/14/2008, -2/+8so then kelmaster1... based on previous science, give us the unifying theory of everything.
- bearcat8543, on 07/14/2008, -4/+10yeah, i totally agree with what he said.
- melonade, on 07/14/2008, -2/+7I didn't find these funny at all. Sorry.
- Godlike, on 07/14/2008, -0/+5CAT PICTURES FTL
- Scrigel, on 07/14/2008, -0/+5@ UnstableMind. Yes it does. This is essentially what happens in particle colliders. When the particles are slammed into each other their kinetic energy is turned into all sorts of exotic particles.
- punkcat, on 07/14/2008, -0/+5I'm a victim of circumstance – Curly
- seventhc, on 07/14/2008, -1/+6Wow, it's hard to believe all that information came out in 57 seconds.
- Genrre, on 07/14/2008, -0/+5At the same time bringing a new age of technology to the world.
- Twaddle852, on 07/14/2008, -0/+5He was just explaining that E=MC^2
where E=Energy
and MC=Hammer - ohcoaster, on 07/14/2008, -2/+6ok he explained that a ***** load of energy can come from a certain mass, but only when it's multiplied by the speed of light squared. I'm just wondering what the ***** is the relation between mass and the speed of light? Is it that it takes a ***** load of energy to accelerate a mass to the speed of light?
- CatalystDM, on 07/14/2008, -2/+6OLDER THAN MCCAIN
- wherley, on 07/14/2008, -0/+4You can read about the experimental verification he mentions here:
http://www.fnal.gov/pub/news04/update_archive/upda ... -
Show 51 - 100 of 212 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is