## Abstract

In 1904, the year before Einstein’s seminal papers on special relativity, Austrian physicist Fritz Hasenöhrl examined the properties of blackbody radiation in a moving cavity. He calculated the work necessary to keep the cavity moving at a constant velocity as it fills with radiation and concluded that the radiation energy has associated with it an apparent mass such that \(E = \tfrac{3} {8}mc^2\). In a subsequent paper, also in 1904, Hasenöhrl achieved the same result by computing the force necessary to accelerate a cavity already filled with radiation. In early 1905, he corrected the latter result to \(E = \tfrac{3} {4}mc^2\). This result, i.e., \(m = \tfrac{4} {3}E/c^2\), has led many to conclude that Hasenöhrl fell victim to the same “mistake” made by others who derived this relation between the mass and electrostatic energy of the electron. Some have attributed the mistake to the neglect of stress in the blackbody cavity. In this paper, Hasenöhrl’s papers are examined from a modern, relativistic point of view in an attempt to understand where he went wrong. The primary mistake in his first paper was, ironically, that he didn’t account for the loss of mass of the blackbody end caps as they radiate energy into the cavity. However, even taking this into account one concludes that blackbody radiation has a mass equivalent of \(m = \tfrac{4} {3}E/c^2\) or \(m = \tfrac{5} {3}E/c^2\) depending on whether one equates the momentum or kinetic energy of radiation to the momentum or kinetic energy of an equivalent mass. In his second and third papers that deal with an accelerated cavity, Hasenöhrl concluded that the mass associated with blackbody radiation is \(m = \tfrac{4} {3}E/c^2\), a result which, within the restricted context of Hasenöhrl’s gedanken experiment, is actually consistent with special relativity. (If one includes all components of the system, including cavity stresses, then the total mass and energy of the system are, to be sure, related by *m* = *E*/*c*
^{2}.) Both of these problems are non-trivial and the surprising results, indeed, turn out to be relevant to the “\(\tfrac{4} {3}\) problem” in classical models of the electron. An important lesson of these analyses is that *E* = *m*
*c*
^{2}, while extremely useful, is not a “law of physics” in the sense that it ought not be applied indiscriminately to any extended system and, in particular, to the subsystems from which they are comprised. We suspect that similar problems have plagued attempts to model the classical electron.

## Article PDF

We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

## References

Bini, D., A. Geralico, R. Jantzen and R. Ruffini. 2011. On Fermi’s resolution of the ‘\hbox{$\frac{4}{3}$}43 problem’ in the classical theory of the electron : hidden in plain sight. To appear in

*Fermi and Astrophysics*, edited by R. Ruffini and D. Boccaletti. World Scientific, Singapore, 2011Boughn, S. and T. Rothman. 2011. Hasenöhrl and the Equivalence of Mass and Energy. arXiv:1108.2250

Boyer, T. 1982. Classical model of the electron and the definition of electromagnetic field momentum.

*Phys. Rev. D***25**: 3246-3250Campos, I. and J. Jiménez. 1986. Comment on the \hbox{$\frac{4}{3}$}43 problem in the electromagnetic mass and the Boyer-Rohrlich controversy.

*Phys. Rev. D***33**: 607-610Campos, I., Jiménez, J. and Roa-Neri, J. 2008. Comment on “The electromagnetic mass in the Born-Infeld theory”.

*Eur. J. Phys.***29**: L7-L11Cuvaj, C. 1968. Henri Poincaré’s Mathematical Contributions to Relativity and the Poincaré Stresses.

*Am. J. Phys.***36**: 1102-1113Fermi, E. 1922. Correzione di una contraddizione tra la teoria elettrodinamica e quella relativistica delle masse elettromenetiche.

*Nuovo Cimento***25**: 159-170. English translation to appear as “Correction of a contradiction between the electrodynamic theory and relativistic theory of electromagnetic masses,” in*Fermi and Astrophysics*, edited by R. Ruffini and D. Boccaletti. World Scientific, Singapore, 2012Fermi, E. 1923a. Sopra i fenomena che avvengono in vicinanza di una linea oraria.

*Rend. Lincei***31**: 21-23. English translation to appear as “On phenomena occuring close to a world line,” in*Fermi and Astrophysics*, edited by R. Ruffini and D. Boccaletti. World Scientific, Singapore, 2012Fermi, E. and A. Pontremoli. 1923b. Sulla mass della radiazione in uno spazio vuoto.

*Rend. Lincei***32**: 162-164. English translation to appear as “On the mass of radiation in an empty space,” in*Fermi and Astrophysics*, edited by R. Ruffini and D. Boccaletti. World Scientific, Singapore, 2012Gamba, A. 1967. Physical quantities in different reference systems according to relativity.

*Am. J. Phys.***35**: 83-89Hasenöhrl, F. 1904a. Zur Theorie der Strahlung in bewegten Körpern.

*Wiener Sitzungsberichte***113**: 1039-1055Hasenöhrl, F. 1904b. Zur Theorie der Strahlung in bewegten Körpern.

*Annalen der Physik***320**: 344-370Hasenöhrl, F. 1905. Zur Theorie der Strahlung in bewegten Körpern, Berichtigung.

*Annalen der Physik***321**: 589-592Hasenöhrl, F. 1907, 1908. Zur Thermodynamik bewegter Systeme.

*Wiener Sitzungsberichte***116**, IIa (9) : 1391-1405 and**117**, IIa (2) : 207-215Jackson, J. 1975.

*Classical Electrodynamics*, 2nd edn. John Wiley and Sons, New YorkJammer, M. 1951.

*Concepts of Mass*. Harvard University Press, CambridgeJammer, M. 2000.

*Concepts of Mass in Contemporary Physics and Philosophy*, pp. 72–73. Princeton University Press, PrincetonKlein, F. 1918. Über die Integralform der Erhaltungssätze und der Theorie die räumlich-geschlossenen Welt.

*Nach. Gesell. Wissensch. Göttingen, Math.-Physik, Klasse*, 394-423Laue, M. 1911.

*Das Relativitätsprinzip*. Vieweg, BraunschweigMisner, C., K. Thorne and J. Wheeler. 1973.

*Gravitation*. W.H. Freeman, New YorkMøller, C. 1972.

*The Theory of Relativity*. Oxford University Press, OxfordNewman, E., and A. Janis. 1959. Ericksen, E. et al. 1982. Rigid Frames in Relativity. Relativistic rigid motion in one dimension.

*Phys. Rev.***116**: 1610-1614Ohanian, H. 2009. Did Einstein Prove

*E*=*m**c*2?*Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics***40**: 167-173Ohanian, H. 2012. Klein’s Theorem and the Proof of

*E*=*mc*2.*Am. J. Phys.*, in pressPauli, W. 1921.

*Theory of Relativity*. Pergamon Press, London, 1958Peebles, J. and D. Wilkinson. 1968. Comment on the anisotropy of the primeval fireball.

*Physical Review***174**: 2168Poincaré, H. 1906. Sur la dynamic de l’electron.

*Rendiconti del Circolo matematico di Palermo***21**: 129176Rohrlich, F. 1960. Self-energy and stability of the classical electron.

*Am. J. Phys.***28**: 639-643Rohrlich, F. 1982. Comment on the preceeding paper by T.H. Boyer.

*Phys. Rev. D***25**: 3251-3255Thomson, J.J. 1881. On the electric and magnetic effects produced by the motion of electrified bodies.

*Philosophical Magazine***11**: 229-249Weinberg, S. 1972.

*Gravitation and Cosmology*. John Wiley & Sons, New York

## Author information

### Authors and Affiliations

### Corresponding author

## About this article

### Cite this article

Boughn, S. Fritz Hasenöhrl and E = mc^{2}
.
*EPJ H* **38**, 261–278 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjh/e2012-30061-5

Received:

Revised:

Published:

Issue Date:

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1140/epjh/e2012-30061-5