Sujet : Re: Energy is for bunny-ahs (traders)
De : jimp (at) *nospam* gonzo.specsol.net (Jim Pennino)
Groupes : sci.physicsDate : 25. Nov 2024, 15:34:19
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <9gee1l-kkkj.ln1@gonzo.specsol.net>
References : 1 2 3
User-Agent : tin/2.6.2-20220130 ("Convalmore") (Linux/5.15.0-126-lowlatency (x86_64))
Bertietaylor <
bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 19:53:26 +0000, David Canzi wrote:
On 11/24/24 04:14, Bertietaylor wrote:
Physics texts should avoid the word "energy" as much as possible.
>
It is an unscientific term as it is so volatile and relative.
>
Besides the so called law of conservation of energy is nonsense as shown
by the phenomenon of radioactivity. Explaining that with e=mcc is even
more nonsense.
>
High time the world quitted bad physics and followed Arindam's physics
that updates Newton and rejects Einstein.
>
If you reject conservation of energy and conservation of momentum
you are shredding Newton, not updating him.
Nonsense. Newton had nothing to do with such a ridiculous notion as law
of conservation of energy. That came from the German scientists like
Helmholtz.
Actually the notion originated before Newton was born, crackpot.
<snip delusional nonsense>
Energy is for bunny-ahs (traders)
Re: Energy is for bunny-ahs (traders)