Changes

This should read ''is claimed by virtually all physicists'': I added a fact-tag to the ''some'' until at least a few (2-3) physicists are found who think that it doesn't demonstrate the equation! I don't know any who hold such a belief... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 19:28, 23 January 2013 (EST)

This should read ''is claimed by virtually all physicists'': I added a fact-tag to the ''some'' until at least a few (2-3) physicists are found who think that it doesn't demonstrate the equation! I don't know any who hold such a belief... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 19:28, 23 January 2013 (EST)

*''Instead, a hand-waving claim was made that an excess in kinetic energy of the resultant helium nuclei, which is greater than the energy of the original nuclei, must be attributable to a loss in mass.'' See (and answer!)  [[# A few questions for Aschlafly regarding this experiment}]! There is no hand-waving, the loss of mass is observed!

*''Instead, a hand-waving claim was made that an excess in kinetic energy of the resultant helium nuclei, which is greater than the energy of the original nuclei, must be attributable to a loss in mass.'' See (and answer!)  [[# A few questions for Aschlafly regarding this experiment]]! There is no hand-waving, the loss of mass is observed!

*''But in fact the overall energy expended to attain this transmutation is greater than the energy produced by it. '' Yes, as most accelerated protons just go through the target - it isn't in the nature of physical experiments to be energy efficient!

*''But in fact the overall energy expended to attain this transmutation is greater than the energy produced by it. '' Yes, as most accelerated protons just go through the target - it isn't in the nature of physical experiments to be energy efficient!

   

   

That isn't a very promising start! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 00:56, 24 January 2013 (EST)

That isn't a very promising start! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 00:56, 24 January 2013 (EST)