Changes

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>

The [[Theory of Relativity]] has never been able to mathematically derive '''E=mc&sup2;''' from first principles, and a physicist observed in a peer-reviewed paper published in 2011 that "Leaving aside that it continues to be affirmed experimentally, a rigorous proof of the mass-energy equivalence is probably beyond the purview of the special theory."<ref>[http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011AmJPh..79..591H Eugene Hecht: ''How Einstein confirmed E₀=mc&sup2;''], American Journal of Physics, Volume 79, Issue 6, pp. 591-600 (2011)</ref>

The [[Theory of Relativity]] has never been able to mathematically derive '''E=mc&sup2;''' from first principles, and a physicist observed in a peer-reviewed paper published in 2011 that "a rigorous proof of the mass-energy equivalence is probably beyond the purview of the special theory."<ref>http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011AmJPh..79..591H</ref>

It has been known for a long time that radiation has a mass equivalence, which was correctly derived by [[Henri Poincare]] in 1904,<ref>http://www.opticsinfobase.org/josa/abstract.cfm?uri=josa-42-8-540</ref> but the equation '''E=mc&sup2;''' makes a claim far beyond that limited circumstance:

It has been known for a long time that radiation has a mass equivalence, which was correctly derived by [[Henri Poincare]] in 1904,<ref>http://www.opticsinfobase.org/josa/abstract.cfm?uri=josa-42-8-540</ref> but the equation '''E=mc&sup2;''' makes a claim far beyond that limited circumstance: