Re: e NOT EQUAL TO mc2
From: vignesh (vignesh28_at_gmail.com)
Date: 02/16/05
- Next message: vignesh: "Proof the Law of Conservation of Energy is Wrong"
- Previous message: DavidBowman: "Re: Boring newsreader issues"
- In reply to: Creighton Hogg: "Re: e NOT EQUAL TO mc2"
- Next in thread: Bilge: "Re: e NOT EQUAL TO mc2"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 16 Feb 2005 07:15:41 -0800
okay it is true to some extend but not with all the examples. so it has
failed to explain few and explain many. but in physics few is also
equal to many. anyway thnxs for your opinion
- Next message: vignesh: "Proof the Law of Conservation of Energy is Wrong"
- Previous message: DavidBowman: "Re: Boring newsreader issues"
- In reply to: Creighton Hogg: "Re: e NOT EQUAL TO mc2"
- Next in thread: Bilge: "Re: e NOT EQUAL TO mc2"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|