🚀 go-pugleaf

"Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1184639223.021362.162670@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 17, 2:07 am, "Jeckyl" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> "BURT" <macromi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:1184620136.419350.260440@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > Rest mass should be  considered the fundamental mass. But binding
>> > energy confuses this.
>> > A proton or neutron outside the nucleus has more mass than inside. A
>> > bound proton or neutron has less mass. So which mass is to be
>> > considered fundamental? the mass inside or outside?
>> > The mass of a bound nucleon or a free one?
>>
>> A very good question.  That's the problem when mass and energy are so
>> closely related. I'm not sure what the 'correct' answer is there.
>> Probably
>> that both are the mass.  Mass can be 'converted' to energy.
>
> -----------
> the   idiot parrot Jekyle

I am neither an idiot nor a parrot

> didnt realise that
> energy is not mass

I didn't say it was .. I said it there is an equivalence between them. 
Einstein's
famous E = mc^2 describes the relationship between rest energy and rest
mass.  Perhaps you've heard of him and the formula?

> IT IS MASS IN MOTION!!
> A JSUT AS SIMPLE AS THAT

No .. that is how you might describe kinetic energy .. there is more to 
energy than that

> and jsut like
> macrocosm !!!

Exactly .. ever hear of potential energy (in classical physics)?

> fro one who deals with binding energies
> of the nuc it is obvious !!
> and since we understood at last that
> THERE IS JSUT ONE KIND OF MASS!!....
> energy has reast mass!

I thought you just said it didn't?

> and i proved iit in a prallel independant  ways

Really .. where is this proof?

> bu the crooks aprrots whold not get it
> because
> a
> it was not 'invented in ***their*** company'

What company is that?

> b
> it is  not written yet
> in their text books ..!!

Probably because what you say is just your own distorted vie of the world
that is not supported by any sound theoretical work, nor any experimental
evidence.

Please .. keep this thread on a scientific basis, and stop hijacking it for
pushing your own weird ideas.