Block, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, edit, rollback
14,697
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 34:
Line 34: + +
Talk:Logical Flaws in E=mc² (view source)
Revision as of 22:01, June 16, 2015
, 22:01, June 16, 201590/10 rule.
:::::::::::Hi Andy, I think you posted the wrong link. The nobel prize speech says "This assertion was satisfactorily confirmed by Cockcroft and Walton, experimental errors being taken into consideration. Somewhat later, more exact investigations based on the same principles gave a complete verification of Einstein's law." [[User:BradSmythe|BradSmythe]] 02:13, 16 June 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::Hi Andy, I think you posted the wrong link. The nobel prize speech says "This assertion was satisfactorily confirmed by Cockcroft and Walton, experimental errors being taken into consideration. Somewhat later, more exact investigations based on the same principles gave a complete verification of Einstein's law." [[User:BradSmythe|BradSmythe]] 02:13, 16 June 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::Too bad you can't explain what you think that means—you violated the 90/10 contribution/talk ratio rule. If you had only made a contribution to the articles.... [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] 18:01, 16 June 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::Andy, let's talk first about ''what is'' (ie.e, the experiment), and then about ''what if''! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 03:18, 16 June 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::Andy, let's talk first about ''what is'' (ie.e, the experiment), and then about ''what if''! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 03:18, 16 June 2015 (EDT)