Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
41 bytes removed ,  20:40, March 28, 2012
keep the (unproven) jargon out unless a compelling case is made for it on the talk page
Line 3: Line 3:  
[[Biblical Scientific Foreknowledge]] predicts that a unified theory of all the laws of physics is impossible, because light and matter were created at different times, in different ways, as described in the [[Book of Genesis]].
 
[[Biblical Scientific Foreknowledge]] predicts that a unified theory of all the laws of physics is impossible, because light and matter were created at different times, in different ways, as described in the [[Book of Genesis]].
   −
Gravitational [[Mass]] is a measure of an object's attractive force to other objects, and is directly related to the forces of [[gravity]].  In contrast, the intrinsic [[energy]] of an object (such as an [[atom]]) is a function of electrostatic charge and other non-inertial forces, having nothing to do with gravity.  Declaring the object's energy to be a function of inertia rather than electrostatics is an absurd and impossible attempt to unify the forces of nature, contrary to [[Biblical Scientific Foreknowledge]].
+
[[Mass]] is a measure of an object's inertia, and is directly related to the force of [[gravity]].  In contrast, the intrinsic [[energy]] of an object (such as an [[atom]]) is a function of electrostatic charge and other non-inertial forces, having nothing to do with gravity.  Declaring the object's energy to be a function of inertia rather than electrostatics is an absurd and impossible attempt to unify the forces of nature, contrary to [[Biblical Scientific Foreknowledge]].
    
For more than a century, the claim that '''E=mc&sup2;''' has never yielded anything of value.  Often it seems to be used as a redefinition of &quot;[[energy]]&quot; for pseudo-scientific purposes, as by the [[lamestream media]]. There have been attempts to find some justification for the equation in already understood processes involved in [[nuclear power]] generation and [[nuclear weapon]]s, and in the speculation about [[antimatter]].<ref>Tyson, Peter. &quot;The Legacy of E=mc&sup2;.&quot; October 11, 2005. PBS ''NOVA''. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/legacy-of-e-equals-mc2.html</ref>
 
For more than a century, the claim that '''E=mc&sup2;''' has never yielded anything of value.  Often it seems to be used as a redefinition of &quot;[[energy]]&quot; for pseudo-scientific purposes, as by the [[lamestream media]]. There have been attempts to find some justification for the equation in already understood processes involved in [[nuclear power]] generation and [[nuclear weapon]]s, and in the speculation about [[antimatter]].<ref>Tyson, Peter. &quot;The Legacy of E=mc&sup2;.&quot; October 11, 2005. PBS ''NOVA''. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/legacy-of-e-equals-mc2.html</ref>
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
126,506

edits

Navigation menu