Changes

'''E=mc²''' is a meaningless, almost nonsensical, statement that purports to relate [all matter to light.<ref>The equation claims that the total energy ''E'' of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass ''m'' multiplied by the square of the speed of light ''c''. The equation only holds true if [[SI]] units are used, hence ''E'' is measured in [[joule]]s, ''m'' in [[kilogram|kilograms]] and ''c'' in [[metre]]s per [[second]]. In other systems of units an additional [[constant]] of proportionality would be required.</ref>  In fact, no theory has successfully unified the laws governing mass (''i.e.'', gravity) with the laws governing light (''i.e.'', electromagnetism).  Simply put, E=mc² is [[liberal]] claptrap.

'''E=mc&sup2;''' is a meaningless, almost nonsensical, statement that purports to relate [all matter to light.<ref>The equation claims that the total energy ''E'' of a body in all forms is equal to that body's mass ''m'' multiplied by the square of the speed of light ''c''. The equation only holds true if [[SI]] units are used, hence ''E'' is measured in [[joule]]s, ''m'' in [[kilogram|kilograms]] and ''c'' in [[metre]]s per [[second]]. In other systems of units an additional [[constant]] of proportionality would be required.</ref>  In fact, no theory has successfully unified the laws governing mass (''i.e.'', gravity) with the laws governing light (''i.e.'', electromagnetism).  Simply put, E=mc&sup2; is [[liberal]] claptrap.

[[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]].

[[Mass]] is a measure of an object's inertia, and is directly related to the forces of [[gravity]].{{fact}}  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 forces of [[gravity]].{{fact}}  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=mc²''' 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]]. The equation has been used as a possible explanation for process involved in [[nuclear power]] generation and [[nuclear weapon]]s, and in the study of [[antimatter]].<ref>Tyson, Peter. &quot;The Legacy of E=mc².&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]]. The equation has been used as a possible explanation for process involved in [[nuclear power]] generation and [[nuclear weapon]]s, and in the study of [[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 derive '''E=mc²''', and a physicist observed in a peer-reviewed paper published in 2011 that &quot;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.&quot;<ref>http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011AmJPh..79..591H</ref>

The [[Theory of Relativity]] has never been able to derive '''mc&sup2;''', and a physicist observed in a peer-reviewed paper published in 2011 that &quot;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.&quot;<ref>http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011AmJPh..79..591H</ref>

One aspect of the formula is 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>  

One aspect of the formula is 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>  

== Description for the layman ==

== Description for the layman ==

Ten top physicists were asked to describe in laymen's terms '''E=mc²''':<ref>http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/einstein/experts.html</ref>{{cquote|''Things that seem incredibly different can really be manifestations of the same underlying phenomena.''|||Nima Arkani-Hamed, Theoretical Physicist, Harvard University}}{{cquote|''You can get access to parts of nature you have never been able to get access to before.''|||Lene Hau, Experimental Physicist, Harvard University}}{{

Ten top physicists were asked to describe in laymen's terms '''E=mc&sup2;''':<ref>http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/einstein/experts.html</ref>{{cquote|''Things that seem incredibly different can really be manifestations of the same underlying phenomena.''|||Nima Arkani-Hamed, Theoretical Physicist, Harvard University}}{{cquote|''You can get access to parts of nature you have never been able to get access to before.''|||Lene Hau, Experimental Physicist, Harvard University}}{{

cquote|''It certainly is not an equation that reveals all its subtlety in the few symbols that it takes to write down.''|||Brian Greene Theoretical Physicist Columbia University}}

cquote|''It certainly is not an equation that reveals all its subtlety in the few symbols that it takes to write down.''|||Brian Greene Theoretical Physicist Columbia University}}

== History of '''E=mc²''' ==

== History of '''E=mc&sup2;''' ==

The [[liberal]] [[Public Broadcasting Service]] explained the history of '''E=mc²''' for its NOVA series as follows:<ref>http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/ancestors-einstein.html</ref>

The [[liberal]] [[Public Broadcasting Service]] explained the history of '''E=mc²''' for its NOVA series as follows:<ref>http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/ancestors-einstein.html</ref>