>Hi Hilmar,
>
>The author of the below link provides two proofs that the mathematical equation for kinetic energy may be incorrect. Is this guy way out in right field, or is it possible that errors could exist in unproved physic works, like the effects of relativity on aging, worm hole, and time wraps, etc.

We were talking about modern physics, not about classical physics; the author of the link tries to refute the (much more established) laws of classical physics. It seems to me that he is mixing things up quite a bit.

"In other words, the rate of energy use (power) by a rocket engine is proportional to the increase in momentum of the foward mass, not the ½mv² of the forward mass."

OK, what this really means is that fuel is wasted. It has nothing to do with the definition of energy, etc.

>Accepting an equation like the one you provided in your example, that has not been proved, ...

I don't agree that "it has not been proved". Particle physicists have to work with the equations of Relativity all the time; if they don't, their results are way off. And they observe the effects in question all the time: particles living longer when moving at high speeds, particles having a higher mass.

It is just in our daily world, were we move at much slower speeds, that these equations are not relevant (in this case, the difference between the equations of classical physics and the Theory of Relativity is so insignificant, that it isn't worthwhile to use the more complicated formulae from the Theory of Relativity).