Invalidity of E = mc2 -- A major Error of Einstein

Dear Professor Wilczek:

I am writing to you because I have found that E = mc² can be invalid [1, 2]. I understand that you and your colleagues have used this formula to derive the asymptotic freedom in the theory of strong interaction [3]. But you have not justified the validity of applying E = mc². In view of that this formula may not be valid for this case, such a justification is necessary. Although this deficiency is originated from Einstein, you simply accept Einstein’s erroneous claim as valid. However, the application of this formula must be proven to be valid. Since your derivation is at least incomplete, it is your responsibility to assure its validity.

Many considered E = mc² as Einstein’s major achievement. However, if one looks carefully, it is clear this is a major error of Einstein due to his over-looking that this formula is inconsistent with the Einstein equation ( R_μν - (1/2)g_μνR = -KT_μν ). Since Einstein equation implies the curvature  

R=Kg^μνT_μν.                          (1)

 The electromagnetic energy cannot affect the curvature R since the trace of an electromagnetic energy-stress tensor is zero, but the mass can. Thus, mass and the electromagnetic energy cannot be equivalent. In fact, equation (1) was first derived by Einstein himself. His failure to see this inconsistency is clear due to his over-sight.

Einstein claimed that a piece of heated-up metal would have an increased weight. However, experimentally, A piece of heated-up metal actually leads to a decrease of weight. Therefore, Einstein is wrong on this issue. Moreover, a charged capacitor and a charged metal ball also have reduced weight. So, Einstein is clearly incorrect.

Also, there are some minor errors in your Nobel speech [3]. 1) In Einstein’s 1905 paper, he used L/c² as the mass. His proof is incomplete because he did not show how the radiation energy L is related to the energy of an electromagnetic wave. 2) It is in 1912 Einstein changed L to a general energy E. Thus, his claim of E/c² can always regarded as a mass is incorrect.

If you have any questions, I shall be happy to answer them. Thank you for your kind attention.

Sincerely yours,

C. Y. Lo

MIT Physics 77

P. S. I may go to Hong Kong in December to report the errors on E= mc². If a reporter asks me the opinion of MIT on this matter, I shall answer him as you would say.

c.c.:  David J Gross, H. David Politzer

References

1.         C. Y. Lo, David P. Chan, and Richard C. Y. Hui, “Oversights of Einstein & Maxwell and their Errors,” the 11^th Symposium in honor of Vigier, Aug. 6-10 at Liege, Belgium, 2018.

2.         C. Y. Lo and Richard C. Y. Hui, Comments on the Invalid Proof of Einstein on L = mc² and E= mc², Phys. Essays Vol 31, No. 1, 2018.

3.         Frank A. Wilczek, “Asymptotic Freedom from Paradox to Paradox, “ Nobel Lecture (Dec. 8, 2004).