The entropy of systems

GD, Proton decay is one of my issues and according to everyone else in the world the process does not exist. I think it is how stars are powered but no one cares. Anyway, the reason its hard to detect is because no on believes in it. They have no problem in finding anything they believe exists even if it doesn't but how do you find something like proton decay if you believe it doesn't happen? Proton decay is just too eligant a process for the current giants of science to consider even though it was kicked around a little back in the 1920s.

I think proton decay cannot be detected because the sub-particles which are subjected to this scrutiny have zero mass therefore they are undetectable. We could call these particles: energy

Here is how confused physics is pertaining to mass and energy:

"A single atom is such a small thing that to talk about its energy in joules would be inconvenient. But instead of taking a definite unit in the same system, like 10#8722;20 J, [physicists] have unfortunately chosen, arbitrarily, a funny unit called an electronvolt (eV) ... I am sorry that we do that, but that's the way it is for the physicists.
Richard Feynman, in a 1961 recorded lecture

"electronvolt As a unit of mass
By mass-energy equivalence, the electron volt is also a unit of mass. It is common in particle physics, where mass and energy are often interchanged, to use eV/c2, where c is the speed of light in a vacuum (from E = mc2). Even more common is to use a system of natural units and simply use eV, with c set to 1 as a unit of mass."

Here they are saying E=m
I think there is a distinction to make between the two.

<b>[GD]
"Here they are saying E=m."
"I think there is a distinction to make between the two."</b>

This is an intriguing comment.

I wonder if you would go into a little more detail about what you mean?

LB

The mass of a body (atom, system)is a measure of its energy content.
I think a body's inertia changes constantly, and this is what causes acceleration (it's energy content changes continually). E=mc2 does not give us an indication how energy flows from matter to the environment.

A mass contains energy but not the other way around.

I will come back to this later.

Particle physicists set the speed of light to a unit value of one, to simplify the lorentzian. The lorentzian is simply an ellipse after all. They are not saying that e = m

(edited)change that lower case e to an upper case e, as we are talking about electron volts, and the lower case e can cause confusion.

GD, The electronvolt is an exact unit of energy that has been observed and measured. The mass of this unit has not been measured but must exist and at this is assumed to be equal to m=E/c^2. The energy of the ev is an exact figure but there is no reason to say the ev mass can be calculated. This has been a source of much error in science for 70 years-the ev is used as a rug to sweep stuff under. Setting C at one is a good idea and does make E=m but how do you translate 1.6x10-19J into a mass unit? The mass of the ev must be assumed to be zero at rest whatever that means in order to make the model work and then you have to invent thinks to explain what is happening that defys the model-or in other words:"we make it fit".