Re: <<Today the electron's mass in kg is only the Moment of its

In article <4739a76e-5517-403b-b8d9-79ff6e03287b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Romano Amodeo says...

On 1 Ago, 17:17, Matthew Johnson <matthew_mem...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <c0107734-c686-4ced-b4f9-cece9433a...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Romano Amodeo says...

[snip]

So I have shown to you 2 important PROOFS.

No, you have done no such thing.



Why not?
FIRST: The derivation by the Candela is a certain PROOF.

No, it is not. It is 'derivation' of nothing, so proof of nothing.

540x10^12 cyles s^-1 = 0.0005400000... x10^18 cycles s^-1

But this is just "cycles per second". The Candela is a measurment of luminous
intensity, which is in different units, namely, watts/solid-angle.

AND NOT 0.00054"and other numbers"...

This is completely irrelevant.

SECOND: The E/m ratio in the water is CERTAINLY 18/2 = 9/1,

I have no idea why you are so certain of this. I am certain, however, that you
do not even have a coherent sense of what "E/m ratio" can mean.

and the mass of the water is that chosen to fix the unitary mass!

"Unitary mass" sounds like nonsense you strung together out of words you
yourself do not understand.

Operators in quantum mechanics are 'unitary'. What you could mean by "unitary
mass" is a mystery to all your readers...

[snip]

IT is the THIRD PROOF beacuse First and second there are,
and are... BOMB-PROOFS!

Not at all.

So also this third one.

I have just shown why the first two 'proofs' were not, neither is this.
It is certainly not 'third proof'.

.

Relevant Pages