Re: Energy?

Liste des GroupesRevenir à s physics 
Sujet : Re: Energy?
De : gbnbu (at) *nospam* agag.cn (Bobauk Guang Chou)
Groupes : sci.math sci.physics sci.physics.relativity
Suivi-à : sci.math sci.physics sci.physics.relativity
Date : 02. Aug 2024, 10:48:12
Autres entêtes
Organisation : To protect and to server
Message-ID : <v8ia0r$3j2er$1@paganini.bofh.team>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
User-Agent : Thoth/1.8.4 (Carbon/OS X)
J. J. Lodder wrote:

gharnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> wrote:
Wozzie-idiot, the disinformation engineer, doesn't understand science.
Of COURSE conservation of energy is falsifiable!  It can be determined
by making measurements. So far, it hasn't been falsified.  Supposed
problems have arisen in the past and were put to rest by finding new
forms of energy or new particles.

not true. In fucking europe we have half-engineers, which is only a one
with a bachelor BSc, hence not a real engineer. Engineers starts with MSc
and PhDs, my friend. I bet the polakker is a half-engineer, the most.

So it is not falsifiable by experiments. It can only be falsified -by
failure- to find a new and better theory of what energy is. (in which it
is again conserved) Of course such a situation is impossible,
for such a failure to find a better thery could just be due to our
collective stupidity. We can never be sure that it cannot exist, Jan

you are so fucking stoopid, the harnagel is one of the most genuine
posters in this group.

Date Sujet#  Auteur
2 Aug 24 o Re: Energy?1Bobauk Guang Chou

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal