Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Talk:Logical Flaws in E=mc² (view source)

Revision as of 19:41, June 14, 2015

357 bytes added ,  19:41, June 14, 2015
o you really think that one experiment from long ago "proved" the formula as a fundamental law of nature? What if the speed of light changes?
Line 6: Line 6:  
::*Everyone who has studied physics as a certain level knows of this experiment. If you wish to convince someone of your "novel view" (more accurate use of this phrase), you should be able to answer this questions and point out your interpretation!  
 
::*Everyone who has studied physics as a certain level knows of this experiment. If you wish to convince someone of your "novel view" (more accurate use of this phrase), you should be able to answer this questions and point out your interpretation!  
 
::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 14:45, 14 June 2015 (EDT)
 
::--[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 14:45, 14 June 2015 (EDT)
 +
 +
:::You didn't respond to my points about logic.  Also, the [[Nobel Prize]] Committee did not claim that the experiment "proved" that E=mc<sup>2</sup>.  Do you really think that one experiment from long ago "proved" the formula as a fundamental law of nature?  What if the speed of light changes?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:41, 14 June 2015 (EDT)
Aschlafly
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, apieditor, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
126,203

edits

Retrieved from "https://www.conservapedia.com/Special:MobileDiff/1159221"

Navigation menu