Changes

829 bytes added ,  06:29, April 9, 2012
Line 459: Line 459:  
::The formula cannot be derived ''in any sensible way'', not merely a rigorous way.  Numerous attempts to derive it have been failures.  Moreover, the first claimed experimental observation for the formual was not dates from 1932, long after the formula was declared to be unquestionable dogma.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:20, 8 April 2012 (EDT)
 
::The formula cannot be derived ''in any sensible way'', not merely a rigorous way.  Numerous attempts to derive it have been failures.  Moreover, the first claimed experimental observation for the formual was not dates from 1932, long after the formula was declared to be unquestionable dogma.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:20, 8 April 2012 (EDT)
 
:::Could you please give us some references to these failed attempts? --[[User:FrederickT3|FrederickT3]] 19:22, 8 April 2012 (EDT)
 
:::Could you please give us some references to these failed attempts? --[[User:FrederickT3|FrederickT3]] 19:22, 8 April 2012 (EDT)
 +
    
::::This took only one search on the internet: [http://discovermagazine.com/2008/sep/01-einstein.s-23-biggest-mistakes 7 failed attempts to prove E=mc<sup>2</sup>].--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:27, 8 April 2012 (EDT)
 
::::This took only one search on the internet: [http://discovermagazine.com/2008/sep/01-einstein.s-23-biggest-mistakes 7 failed attempts to prove E=mc<sup>2</sup>].--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:27, 8 April 2012 (EDT)
 +
:::::Aschlafly, your reading of Cockcroft lecture is insufficient. He writes: ''It was obvious then that lithium was being disintegrated into two α-particles with a total energy release of 17.2 million volts. This energy could be provided by a diminution of mass of 0.0184 mass units, '' so he thinks that energy can be provided by decreasing the mass of an object. And if you do a little math, you can see for yourself that he uses Einstein's formula to calculate the amount.
 +
:::::As for the ''seven failed attempts'': Even if there were mathematical errors in the papers as your ''"source"'' suggests, it is not clear that they render the calculations invalid!
 +
:::::I'm impressed which sources you are willing to ignore, and which seem to be absolutely acceptable,,,
 +
:::::[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 02:29, 9 April 2012 (EDT)
Block, SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit, rollback
5,023

edits