Sorry, I did not intend that you would "use a scientific theory in your daily life".
I merely wanted to say that "E=mc^2" is _not_ science. The science lies in the test, the actions you can take. I thought I said that. But maybe I was unclear. On 04/23/2013 07:57 AM, Russ Abbott wrote: > But I can test E=mc^2 by gaining access to the equipment that allows for > such tests. I don't have to build it myself. I still don't see the > difference. My original point wasn't about testing e=mc^2; it was about > using it in my daily life. I still don't see how I would use it other than > in devices that I don't build but that take advantage of it--although I > can't think of any of those either. Does a nuclear power generator count? I > can't built it, but I can take advantage of it. -- glen =><= Hail Eris! ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
