Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder1-1.proxad.net!cleanfeed4-a.proxad.net!nnrp3-2.free.fr!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Energy?
From: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder)
Reply-To: jjlxa31@xs4all.nl (J. J. Lodder)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2024 10:05:56 +0200
References: <Energy-20240728103722@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <66A8307B.8B6@ix.netcom.com> <9U6dneBCi4_A_DX7nZ2dnZfqn_qdnZ2d@giganews.com> <66A9CBC9.2213@ix.netcom.com> <66a9ef78$1$8237$426a34cc@news.free.fr> <17e73ef78c331cc1$123024$505064$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com> <7c859ee125873c07a6e93c2ff0fa5099@www.novabbs.com> <17e766fee8072224$32990$558427$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> <7d6a2d9468448e1cf6ca34ac933b4f40@www.novabbs.com>
Organization: De Ster
Mail-Copies-To: nobody
User-Agent: MacSOUP/2.8.5 (ea919cf118) (Mac OS 10.12.6)
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <66ac9361$1$11712$426a34cc@news.free.fr>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 02 Aug 2024 10:05:54 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.10.137.58
X-Trace: 1722585954 news-4.free.fr 11712 213.10.137.58:58966
X-Complaints-To: abuse@proxad.net
Bytes: 2960

gharnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:43:47 +0000, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >
> > W dniu 31.07.2024 o 17:30, gharnagel pisze:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 31 Jul 2024 8:30:15 +0000, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > > >
> > > > And thus - conservation of energy, your alleged
> > > > "law of nature" is really a simple language truism
> > > > (and it's not a critique, just stating the fact).
> > >
> > > So Wozzie doesn't believe energy conservation is a
> > > law?
> >
> > Herrie, poor halfbrain, you're free to
> > believe  The Nature herself speaking to Chosen
> > Ones and reveal Her Laws for repeating to
> > little ones; but  only  idiots like you
> > can believe  such crap.
> 
> So eighth-brain Wozzie, by his own admission,
> doesn't believe in conservation of energy.
> Why would that be?  Perhaps it's because he
> doesn't believe in anything?
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihilism
> 
> > With the definition above - your "law" is
> > a simple truism, and some  fanatic idiots
> > screaming "NOOOOOO!!!!" change nothing.
> 
> Wozzie-idiot, the disinformation engineer,
> doesn't understand science.  Of COURSE
> conservation of energy is falsifiable!  It
> can be determined by making measurements.
> So far, it hasn't been falsified.  Supposed
> problems have arisen in the past and were
> put to rest by finding new forms of energy
> or new particles.

So it is not falsifiable by experiments.
It can only be falsified -by failure-
to find a new and better theory
of what energy is. (in which it is again conserved)

Of course such a situation is impossible,
for such a failure to find a better thery
could just be due to our collective stupidity.
We can never be sure that it cannot exist,

Jan