The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete --Allen3 ^talk 00:42, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Trivial result of special relativity

• Delete. Gazpacho 07:37, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, arbitrary topic. Kappa 07:49, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, nn, trivial, silly. GTBacchus 09:03, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Interesting, but contextless nonsense. How about an article on the 2.272727kg electron? --Cactus.man ✍ 09:08, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete crap --Rogerd 04:55, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• This looks like garbaaaage. But are there any expert physicits around to comment on the topic prior to deletion of the stub?--Gaff ^talk 10:15, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• comment This may well be a good example to include in an article like special relativity, but at the moment I'm unconvinced it's deserving of its own article. I'm also having trouble figuring out what it's saying, because it's lacking enough technical information (which means I'm having trouble believing for sure that it's factually correct information and this isn't a hoax/imaginary item). For instance, "weight" is just a description of the force due to gravity, so is this saying that the electron's had enough momentum imparted to it that it strikes a target and the impulse in the collision is five pounds of force, or is it saying that the electron's accelerated to such a speed that it has a relativistic mass with regards to the earth (I'm assuming this is going on on earth) that earth's gravity is able to impart 5 pounds of normal force on it? The Literate Engineer 16:58, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, now has a happy home on BJAODN. Alphax ^τεχ 14:43, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, it's pointless. But good for a laugh.--Vertigo200 16:26, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.