To: WildTurkey
"we now believe" as of 1940 but can't detect it with the technology of the day
got anything more recent?
1,590 posted on
02/10/2005 12:27:58 PM PST by
King Prout
(Remember John Adam!)
To: King Prout
I was trying to supply something from the better minds of our times. Try this discussion of simple heating, not even a chemical reaction. http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:6DWqpXmT8cEJ:fie.engrng.pitt.edu/eng12/Author/final/132.doc+combustion+mass+to+energy+conversion+e%3Dmc2&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 "Now we can reserve the relation E=mc2 and say that an increase of E in the amount of energy must be accompanied by an increase of E/c2 in the mass. It is very easy to supply energy to massfor instance heat it by ten degrees. So why not measure the mass increase connected with this change? It is nearly impossible. Keep in mind that the speed of light is equal to three hundred million meters per second. Thus in calculating the mass increase, one would divide the energy by the speed of light squared. When such a big number is in the denominator, the quotient (or answer to division problem) tends to be very small. Thus an increase in mass does occur, but it is too small to be measured directly; even with the most sensitive balance."
1,594 posted on
02/10/2005 12:47:30 PM PST by
WildTurkey
(When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson