>In theory, to break something requires a relatively small amount of energy, even if a lot of force is required, since the distance involved is small.

Sorry Hilmar the misconception is yours, you cannot have a lot of force applied with a small amount of energy expended, this is the point I am making about the flaw in the current model that you can't have work without displacement.

I will agree to disagree with you, but I am confindent that I will be proved right the near future.

>You can hardly take a process that is not completely understood, and whose measurement is "highly erroneous", as PROOF that energy conservation is violated.
>
>We all know that several processes are not yet well-understood, but whether some of them are related to violation of energy conservation or not, remains to be seen.

Hilmar, they have been studying these anomolies for the last 80-100years and still can't quantify them to the current model, this is because in the current environment, anything that doesn't fit the model is sidelined and we are asked just to accept them as they are, that is not good science.

I agree to disagree.