# Experiment to test W=mg

I don't think anyone is suggesting it is "perfect" or need "no further testing" - rather, the point is, you need to have some basis to demand a new test, as well as an idea as to what that test is.

In counterpoint - are you suggesting E=mc^2 is flawed?
The basis to demand a test (beside to test E=mc2) is my theory and I explained in the first reply of this thread how I think this experiment should be done.
The experiment I proposed will test if E=mc2 is flawed.

The basis to demand a test (beside to test E=mc2) is my theory and I explained in the first reply of this thread how I think this experiment should be done.
The experiment I proposed will test if E=mc2 is flawed.

Countless other experiments have verified E=mc^2 is not flawed - why would yours be different?
Come up with some sort of proof - your theory is not proof of itself, and circular reasoning like that will get you laughed out of any credible agency of science.

So you are not interested to test E=mc2 ?
Heck no. I am terrified that we will find out that you are right and all the physicist will lose their jobs and I will have to stop being a Chemical Engineer and will have to become a Alchemy Engineer!

The University of Leeds advised me to drop my theory without results of experiments and elsewhere I couldn't find scientists interested to do the experiment and publish the results.
My prediction is a qualitative prediction. I can't make a quantitative prediction without results. Say, after an experiment you find 1 microgram lost per 1 gram per 1 degC you can make quantitative predictions.
Glaser, Metrologia, 1990 used precision balance to measure W reduction of 100 micrograms from 20 grams metal rod heated by 5 degC in air. Such precision balance may be sufficient to find the missing weight predicted by my theory.
That's absurd. You must have a quantitative prediction if your theory is any good. And if you don't, how can anybody construct an experiment of sufficient sensitivity to test it?

Science hasn't got a unifying theory that links the great pillars of physics relativity and quantum together and appears full of corrections such as dark matter and energy, black holes, inflation, tunneling, superpositions, higgs exc. My theory reduces four forces to one, particles to two and dimensions to three and predicts a link between weight and temperature.
Can I actually feel sorry for you without repercussions?

So you are not interested to test E=mc2 ?

Correct. As I have already explained, it has been tested many many times already and found correct.

I think it was Einstein who said that repeating the same thing over and over again in the hope of different results was a sign of madness.

Countless other experiments have verified E=mc^2 is not flawed - why would yours be different?
Come up with some sort of proof - your theory is not proof of itself, and circular reasoning like that will get you laughed out of any credible agency of science.
E=mc2 predicts W should increase at increasing T in vacuum (tiny immeasurable bit). W reduction at increasing T in vacuum, if exists, disproves E=mc2 and W=mg and the most fundamental axiom in physics - conservation of mass.

That's absurd. You must have a quantitative prediction if your theory is any good. And if you don't, how can anybody construct an experiment of sufficient sensitivity to test it?
Use the most precise balance you can get your hand on and publish the results.

Correct. As I have already explained, it has been tested many many times already and found correct.

I think it was Einstein who said that repeating the same thing over and over again in the hope of different results was a sign of madness.
But my experiment could prove it wrong.

E=mc2 predicts W should increase at increasing T in vacuum (tiny immeasurable bit). W reduction at increasing T in vacuum, if exists, disproves E=mc2 and W=mg and the most fundamental axiom in physics - conservation of mass.

Then it should be easy for you to come up with an experiment to test this.
Use the most precise balance you can get your hand on and publish the results.

Why is the onus on someone else to test your theory?

But my experiment could prove it wrong.
Then do a write up on it, and propose to have it tested by someone with the means to do so. You will have to provide estimates on cost, materials, and other such requirements.

Then it should be easy for you to come up with an experiment to test this.

Why is the onus on someone else to test your theory?
This experiment is designed to test a prediction of my theory against a prediction of yours. If you are not interested place thread back in physics and math forum so other physicists see thread and conclude the experiment.

Then it should be easy for you to come up with an experiment to test this.

Why is the onus on someone else to test your theory?

Then do a write up on it, and propose to have it tested by someone with the means to do so. You will have to provide estimates on cost, materials, and other such requirements.
I couldn't find anybody interested to help me write a proposal.

This experiment is designed to test a prediction of my theory against a prediction of yours. If you are not interested place thread back in physics and math forum so other physicists see thread and conclude the experiment.

Oh ho ho? Pray tell, what "prediction" have I made? Kindly point that out to me, as I must have been in some sort of fugue state when it happened, as I don't recall making any such prediction.

What I do recall doing is reiterating to you what decade after decade of science has proven to be true.

And, no, I shan't be placing this back in "physics and math" at this time - this is an alternative theory with no apparent evidence to back it beyond your imagination... so there is no meat and potatoes herein which gives it any weight.

I couldn't find anybody interested to help me write a proposal.

Why do you need someone else to write a proposal? If your idea is that good, surely you should be able to do so yourself? Nobody at your school was interested in helping in what could potentially be a nobel prize winning effort? Hmm... maybe that is indicative of something?

Oh ho ho? Pray tell, what "prediction" have I made? Kindly point that out to me, as I must have been in some sort of fugue state when it happened, as I don't recall making any such prediction.

What I do recall doing is reiterating to you what decade after decade of science has proven to be true.

And, no, I shan't be placing this back in "physics and math" at this time - this is an alternative theory with no apparent evidence to back it beyond your imagination... so there is no meat and potatoes herein which gives it any weight.

Why do you need someone else to write a proposal? If your idea is that good, surely you should be able to do so yourself? Nobody at your school was interested in helping in what could potentially be a nobel prize winning effort? Hmm... maybe that is indicative of something?
Exactly!

Then come up with a test process, materials requirements, etc, and you will have something to propose...

Until then, you don't have a theory - you have the product of an active imagination. That isn't a bad thing - but don't expect NASA to take time and money to test everything that pops into someones head.

Then come up with a test process, materials requirements, etc, and you will have something to propose...

Until then, you don't have a theory - you have the product of an active imagination. That isn't a bad thing - but don't expect NASA to take time and money to test everything that pops into someones head.
All great theories begun in someones head and mine is testable.

All great theories begun in someones head and mine is testable.

Again, and this will likely be the last I'll post until you do it - write up a test plan, document what the expected resources are, what you will need to accomplish the test, estimated costs, etc. Provide some sort of mathematical proof to show a reason to bother with the expenditure of resources to conduct the test.

Again, and this will likely be the last I'll post until you do it - write up a test plan, document what the expected resources are, what you will need to accomplish the test, estimated costs, etc. Provide some sort of mathematical proof to show a reason to bother with the expenditure of resources to conduct the test.
I think it is way too late for grant proposals now. #ResultsRequired

But my experiment could prove it wrong.
Off you go then and do it. We'll all listen attentively to you once you have solid results to support your theory.

But not before.

Off you go then and do it. We'll all listen attentively to you once you have solid results to support your theory.

But not before.
I don't like to repeat myself but don't have the skills to do the experiment on my own. This experiment should be carried by proper experimentalists to test W=mg. #ResultsRequired