Norman Wells wrote:
Tim S wrote:
Norman Wells coughed up some electrons that declared:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Norman Wells wrote:


Wrong. You're working from his equation, assuming that it applies
to all events involving energy transfer when it doesn't.

Ah. So Einsteins theory of relativity is not applicable to anything
and everything in the world?

Depends which bit of it you're talking about. His formula e=mc^2
certainly isn't though.

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy states it quite clearly

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/equivME/#1.1

Section 1.2.1:

"In this example, the novel claim made by special relativity is that
the inertial mass of a physical system changes when the system either
absorbs or emits energy. No such change occurs according to
pre-relativistic physics. In pre-relativistic physics, the inertial
mass of the gold bar, i.e., the bar's tendency to resist changes in
velocity, is the same at all temperatures."

'Inertial mass'. Is that the same as 'mass'? If so, why do we need two
different terms for it? If not, why do we have to invent a new definition?

When I come across something like this, especially in connection with
something so basic as 'mass', it always seems as if someone is trying to
fiddle the facts to fit the conclusions he's already reached. Doesn't
it to you?


No, but then unlike you, I don't make a habit of doing that.


If an edited publication from Stanford University isn't good enough
for you, perhaps you'll take it from the original author:

http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/

Norman - perhaps you would be so kind and either put up or shut up.

Do you not like your prejudiced conclusions questioned then? Or are
they just beliefs with no real foundation?

Its not a question of belief: Either you accept Einstein's theories as
the best we have,, and as far as we know correct so far, or you don't.

WE aren't saying that is what we BELIEVE, we are saying that is what the
theory implies.

mass change with potential energy change of ANY sort is IMPLICIT in the
theory of relativity.

Its not me you are arguing with, its Einstein, his theory, and those who
accept it as if not Truth, certainly the best approximation so far.

So, was Einstein wrong? If you think so, don't argue with ME, write a
learned paper and show repeatable experimental procedures that can
refute it, and if, after peer review, it proves to be refutable, take
your Nobel prize.

However, I think citing a badly written line from an out of date
dictionary, won't actually get you very far.