"I have no problem with that (you disagreeing that is). However, the
fact
that you and your classmates missed the point does not refute my
conclusion."
I'll take my physics professors at Carnegie Tech's word for it
that we did not miss the point. It was a pleasing exercise.
"The law of conservation of momentum is a fundamental physical law; so
much
of modern science is based on it that if it were proven to be false, or
if
exceptions were to be found, the vast majority of accepted theories in
most
disciplines would either collapse or have to be reconfigured."
No disagreement on this, of course.
"That's why I called such an exception a non-natural phenomenon, because
it
would violate the very nature of the physical universe as we understand
it
to be. And if that were the only exception extant, it would be more
likely
to be a non-natural anomaly rather than a representation of new physical
laws."
And that's where we must part company, of course. There are, of course,
an infinite number of ways the phenomenon could be observed w/o violating
the law of momentum conservation. Natural ways.
I found a little top one day, many years ago, which, when I start it
spinning, continues to spin "forever," or at least until I reach ot and
stop it. Is it demonstrating a non-natural phenomenon? Of course not. Is
it violating the law of energy conservation? You tell me.
Burgy
___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]