Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
663 bytes added ,  20:34, March 28, 2012
Line 96: Line 96:     
:::The quotes were solicited to describe the meaning of the equation to laymen, not to illustrate how difficult that is.  The difficulty arises from the meaningless nature of the equation.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:01, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
 
:::The quotes were solicited to describe the meaning of the equation to laymen, not to illustrate how difficult that is.  The difficulty arises from the meaningless nature of the equation.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:01, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
 +
::::Actually the meaning of the equation is very clear: the total energy contained in matter is its mass multiplied by the speed of light in a vaccum squared. Experiment after experiment, and nuclear reactor after nuclear reactor, has clearly demonstrated that the total energy released by a reaction is the lost mass multiplied by c<sup>2</sup>. Therefore whether the theories of relativity are true or not, E=mc<sup>2</sup> is true. Equally, even if classical Newtonian mechanics was false, the kinetic energy of a moving mass would still be accurately described by E<sub>k</sub>=1/2mv<sup>2</sup>. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 16:34, 28 March 2012 (EDT) 
 
::::Indeed. Internet quotes are really not very useful. A skilled researcher can always find someone saying something to justify their position however bizarre or immoral.  This is a typical weakness (and response!) of those who have no real moral or religious basis for their convictions. --[[User:DavidEdwards|DavidEdwards]] 19:04, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
 
::::Indeed. Internet quotes are really not very useful. A skilled researcher can always find someone saying something to justify their position however bizarre or immoral.  This is a typical weakness (and response!) of those who have no real moral or religious basis for their convictions. --[[User:DavidEdwards|DavidEdwards]] 19:04, 26 March 2012 (EDT)
  
539

edits

Navigation menu