Re: E = 3/4 mc² or E = mc²? The forgotten Hassenohrl 1905 work.

In what is considered as the first experimental proof of Einstein's 1905
E = mc² paper, 27 years after (1932), the English physicist John
Cockroft and the Irish physicist Ernest Walton produced a nuclear
disintegration by bombarding Lithium with artificially accelerated
protons.
They used beams of protons accelerated with 600,000 Volts to strike
Lithium7 atoms, which resulted in the creation of two alpha particles.
The experiment was celebrated as a proof of E = mc², even when the
results were closer to E = 3/4 mc², BUT NOBODY WANTED TO NOTICE THIS!
For this paper, Cockcroft and Walton won the 1951 Nobel Prize in Physics
for their work on the FIRST artificial transmutation of atomic nuclei,
not for proving E = mc², a FALSE CLAIM still used by relativists.
Cockcroft and Walton NEVER HAD IN MIND to prove E = mc², as it can be
shown in his 1932 publication, nor they mentioned Einstein even once:
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rspa.1932.0133
Yet, relativists hurried to celebrate the experiment as a triumph of
Einstein's theories, because they needed such accomplishment to
celebrate the veracity of their pseudoscience.
The equation for their experiment was the following:
7:3 Li + 1:1 H ---> 4:2 He + 4:2 He + energy
From their paper, this is the balance (as published in 1932):
Lithium7 amu 7.0104
Hydrogen amu 1.0072
        8.0176
Helium amu 4.0011
Helium amu 4.0011
        8.0022
Difference  0.0154 ± 0.003 amu = 14.3 ± 2.7 MeV
The difference in energy using E = mc², with 2024 NIST values, varies
from -2.1% to -49.7%, AVERAGING almost -25%.
CURIOUSLY, the average error over hundred of measurements is EXACTLY the
factor 0.75 of the Hassenohrl's formula  E = 3/4 mc².
What happened with the history of this experiment. Was it re-written
since THIS single experiment, NEVER EVER REPEATED, to hype Einstein?
---------------------------------------------------
These are the values with NIST 2024:
Lithium7 amu 7.0160034366
Hydrogen amu 1.00782503223
        8.02382846883
Helium amu 4.00260325413
Helium amu 4.00260325413
        8.00520650826
Difference  0.01862196057 amu
         17.36590E+07 MeV
************************************************************
INTERESTING: 92 years after the 1932 experiment, NIST managed to correct
the amu of the elements, so the difference FITS with E = mc².
WORSE YET: In the Manhattan booklet "Los Alamos Primer", written by
Serber & Oppenheimer in 1943, to instruct scientists recruited for the
project, the calculations WRITTEN THERE were based on electrostatic
repulsion of split atoms, which ALSO DIFFER IN A SIMILAR AMOUNT with the
infamous 200 MeV computed by Meitner and her nephew in 1939.
Serber, on his 1992 book, affirmed that nuclear fission WAS UNRELATED to
E = mc², and that the fission process was NON-RELATIVISTIC.
Yet, just after WWII finished, the infamous Time Magazine cover had the
figure of Einstein and the nuclear cloud with E = mc² written on it.
Time Magazine was widely known as an outlet of Jewish propaganda, and
still is (what was left of it).
So, Hassenohrl was the real deal and Einstein the Jewish icon to be
hyper-hyped as the most important physicist since Babylon times?
From 1932 to 1943, the brightest minds involved in EXPERIMENTAL nuclear
fission DIDN'T SUPPORT E = mc².
The above FACT has to count, and open the eyes of most. The drive to
reinstall the genius of Einstein and relativity re-started in the early
'50s, and never did stop (cosmology, particle physics, etc.).
We live in a world of lies and INFAMOUS reconstruction of history, and I
mean ALL THE HISTORY.