I was watching the science channel last night about neutron stars. They said a guy name Bunhard or something like that had a theory about them but his theory said E=mc2 is wrong. Can anyone tell if his theory was right or wrong?

Was it a show about Gamma Ray Bursts? Neutron stars are seen as one of the possible causes of GRB's...

E-mc2 would be wrong is this appernt free energy is true, but, i dont think theres any deffinate proof that its wrong at this time.

Actually, some scientists theorize that a Gamma Ray Burst is caused by the collision of two Neutron stars, but the release of energy is so large, that the theory would make E=mc2 false.

I've always leaned towards the theory that Gamma Ray Bursts are cause by death of a so-called "super" star.

Im more into thinking its what happens when a blackhole Dies.
Dont know if its a really theorie, or just one i thought up in my head.

Everything has an end, and with the ammont they sucked up in their time, that'd make up why it shoots out so much energy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma_ray_burst

Here's a really good Wikipedia article on Gamma Ray Bursts...

Something ammazes me, The rays we see, actully happened over a billion years ago (Time it takes light to get to us).
For all we know, we should be the last star left, and it'd be trillions of years until we see and empty universe, Very unlikely, but still, pretty scary.

That would be scary. Never thought of a black hole dying could cause it. Would they have to re-due E=MC2 if it ever became wrong? Also how close would it have to be in order to do any damage to Earth? The show said 300 light years but could it be farther than that?

It's possible to estimate the life span of a star, and by seeing how far away it is and subtracting the time light takes to reach us, we can see which stars will be here a bit longer still. And new stars are created all the time. I can pretty much guarantee you we don't have the only sun left in the universe

I know lol just thinking, man so creepy and cold if true.
When i star dies, doesnt it's matter spread out into a big gas cloud so new ones can be born?
Now, why do some people thing the universe will expand till empty though, it'd never get empty with ones dying and being reborn.

Well you can stop worrying. There's plenty of things to worry about without having to make up more.


Sometimes, that's what happens, sure thing. Here's the same question answered on 'ask yahoo':
http://ask.yahoo.com/20020701.html

I know only a little about the relativity theory, it's really complicated to fully understand i think, so help me out here, why exactly does a gamma ray burst make E=mc2 false?

i imagine that, i think E=mc2 Means Energy=MassX something Squared
but the energy that comes out isnt right with what mc2 says it should be


:S I hate physics :cry:

E=mc2 means Energy is equal to mass times the speed of light squared.

It means as well that you can't travel faster than the speed of light because mass will increase indefinitely.

The gamma ray bursts consist apparently of a form of energy that breaks the law of Einstein. Am i right? As i said, i know little...

Hear you go Crafth wiki's got alot on GRBs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma_ray_burst

Thanks.
I saw that one before, i didn't read it all since i just wondered why GRB make the E=mc2 theory false.. But i'll read it, it's interesting anyway

That is interesting why do they make E=MC2 false something I dont think I wont find out in my life time.

I still don't understand why the relativity theory is wrong because of gamma-ray bursts...
This guy, named Bunhard (or something), what was his theory, and why did it say E=mc2 is wrong?

How can you ask if is theory is wrong or not, if we don't know what theory he has?

Could you explain more?

E=MC2 means energy= mass times the speed of light squared. A neutron is small. He thinks when it blows up we can feel it from billions of light years away. He says that a neutron star doesnt have enough mass to create the energy it produces. That would make E=MC2 wrong.

ok, thanks, it's becoming a bit clearer.
Obviously i know what E=mc2 stands for (in words and symbols, but that's no use),
But has Einstein have a definition on mass? What's mass if energy is like mass times the speed of light squared?
The speed of light is a certain factor. I just don't understand what mass is.

I'm sorry i'm stupid, maybe i should study fysics to fully understand this..