| Line 636: |
Line 636: |
| | ::BTW: I personally think that it would have been apt if Robert Dicke shared the prize with Penzias and Wilson for this important test of the Big Bang model of the universe. | | ::BTW: I personally think that it would have been apt if Robert Dicke shared the prize with Penzias and Wilson for this important test of the Big Bang model of the universe. |
| | ::And could you please answer [[#A few questions for Aschlafly regarding the experiment of Cockcroft¹ and Walton]]? It is nice that you address any political or historical point raised here on this talk-page, but you should answer to the physical and mathematical questions, too: those are the important ones... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 00:28, 10 February 2013 (EST) | | ::And could you please answer [[#A few questions for Aschlafly regarding the experiment of Cockcroft¹ and Walton]]? It is nice that you address any political or historical point raised here on this talk-page, but you should answer to the physical and mathematical questions, too: those are the important ones... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 00:28, 10 February 2013 (EST) |
| | + | |
| | + | == Reasons to restore the version of Feb 10, 2010 == |
| | + | |
| | + | Andrew Schlafly, you reverted some edits, claiming that you ''restored "Simply put, E=mc2 is liberal claptrap" and other truths''. "Simply put, E=mc2 is liberal claptrap" doesn't become a truth just because you are repeating it! I'll take you through some of the edits - again - and I hope that you won't make this kind of silly reversion again. |
| | + | |
| | + | {|class="wikitable" |
| | + | !Andrew Schlafly |
| | + | !Rest of the World |
| | + | !Comment |
| | + | |- |
| | + | |'''E=mc²''' is [[Einstein]]'s famous formula which asserts that the energy ('''E''') which makes up the [[matter]] in any body is equal to the square of the [[speed of light]] ('''c²''') times the [[mass]] ('''m''') of that body. |
| | + | |'''E=mc²''' is [[Einstein]]'s famous formula which states that energy ('''E''') of a body is equivalent to the square of the [[speed of light]] ('''c²''') times the [[mass]] ('''m''') of that body. |
| | + | |The formula is called the mass-energy-equivalence - this is reflected by the version on the right. |
| | + | |- |
| | + | | |
| | + | |there are many derivations for special cases and experimental verifications |
| | + | |Yes, there are: some of those can be found later in the article |
| | + | |- |
| | + | |For example, [[Robert Dicke]], perhaps the greatest physicist of the 20th century, was denied a [[Nobel Prize]] because he doubted the [[Theory of Relativity]] |
| | + | | |
| | + | |Any source for this statement? No. It's a conspiracy, so the statement is true because there is no proof for it! Anyway, Robert Dicke only had problems with the '''general theory''', and not with this formula. |
| | + | |- |
| | + | |Simply put, '''E=mc²''' is [[liberal claptrap]]. |
| | + | | |
| | + | |Andrew, you seem to think that this follows from the sentences above - but it doesn't. It's not even an opinion you have, it's a kind of gut-feeling. |
| | + | |- |
| | + | |But light has never been unified with matter despite more than a billion-dollars-worth of attempts, and it is likely impossible to ever do so. |
| | + | | |
| | + | |That has nothing to do with the formula. |
| | + | |- |
| | + | |Claims can be found on liberal, second-tier college websites that the equation is used in [[nuclear power]] generation, [[nuclear weapon]]s, ([[nuclear fusion]], [[nuclear fission]], and speculation about [[antimatter]]. |
| | + | |At virtually all colleges and universities physicists explain how the equation is used in [[nuclear power]] generation, [[nuclear weapon]]s, ([[nuclear fusion]], [[nuclear fission]], and speculation about [[antimatter]]). |
| | + | |That's why I added quotes from the physics department at the MIT - hardly a second-tier college. You are ignoring inconvenient facts to make a misleading statement! |
| | + | |} |
| | + | |
| | + | --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 03:03, 11 February 2013 (EST) |