Disclaimer: I never have studied physics.
Could Einstein be wrong ?
In our real world we don’t see matter as matter but only as objects, and only as objects.
Does that mean E <- mc² but not E -> mc², or in general E=mc² is not complete in our real world, since a gold coin could be transformed to an amount of energy, but not vice versa ?
There’s no transformation going on. Energy and matter are the same thing.
First, you really should look around the net and/or library or bookstore. There do exist some some beginners books on physics.
Answers to your questions:
Q1a) Sure, Einstein could be wrong, just line Aristotle and Newton were wrong. But for now, he’s the best we’ve got. Or:
Q1b) Depends on what you mean by “wrong”. Aristotle was pretty good for his time, and Newton refined it. Einstein refined Newton’s laws, and people are now working on refining Einstein. Does that mean Einstein was wrong? I dunno.
Q2) What’s the difference between “matter” and “objects”?
Q3) Theoretically, you CAN convert energy to gold. But you’d need an awful lot of energy for even a tiny bit of gold, and you’d have to control it well enough to do it. The scientists may have actually transformed a bunch of energy into a couple of atoms, I’m not sure.
Q2) What’s the difference between “matter” and “objects”?
Yes, but that is the question.
If I have a 10 gram 24kt. coin or a 10 gram 24kt. ring it would be the same in terms of matter but not in terms of objects. Therefore the gold (matter) could be transformed in
it’s equivalent of energy but it would not be possible by the actual theory transforming the same energy into the same objects.
Q2) What’s the difference between “matter” and “objects”?
Yes, but that is the question.
If I have a 10 gram 24kt. coin or a 10 gram 24kt. ring it would be the same in terms of matter but not in terms of objects. Therefore the gold (matter) could be transformed in
it’s equivalent of energy but it would not be possible by the actual theory transforming the same energy into the same objects.
Don’t look at it in terms of objects, just see it as various arrangements of various subatomic particles. For example, you could turn 10g of gold into 10g of platinum simply by rearranging protons and neutrons. If you turned it into energy, you could turn the energy into 10g of antimatter or neutrinos or some other exotic form of matter. The only thing seperating a ton of bullshit from a ton of gold is how the constituent subatomic particles are arranged, nothing else.
Was Einstein wrong? Quite possibly, but we haven’t disproved him in a way that explains all of the evidence that supports his theories yet, so we’re stuck with his theories until we find something better. That’s just how science works.
Scientists have conducted experiments wherein matter became energy or energy became matter, many, many times. However, our techniques for doing so are still very, very primitive. Particle accelerators, for instance, increase particular particles’ (generally electrons or protons, since they’re the easiest to move, using magnetic fields) kinetic energy, and attempt to cause particles moving in opposite directions to collide over detector arrays.
When they collide over the detectors, the energy released by the collision creates many different particles of various lifespans, some of which are detected. Muons, protons, positrons, quarks, neutrinos, etc., fly away from the epicenter at various speeds. Trying to create a gold atom out of that collision is the quantum equivalent of firing two granite blocks at each other, and hoping their collision will create a replica of Michaelangelo’s “David”.
But, theoretically, with advanced-enough technology, it could be done.