The Best Logique Evidence of God Existence

[comet]

I am sorry, maybe I wasn't clear.  I went back and reread the post.  I think i got confused with "energy is the Time component of ...".  I thought you were saying that "energy is time", that's what I got confused with.  You were just saying that the fourth vector is an energy vector, not that time is energy.

All I am saying is that scientist do not know what energy is.  They can describe what it does and what happens to it to form particles, but they do not know what it is.  Back to my wife and car.

No, I am saying that the energy of a particle is the fourth piece of a vector, the rest of which describes momentum.

And it is not clear what you mean when you say 'scientists don't know what energy is'. Sure we do. It's the fourth component of the energy-momentum vector.

The problem is that 'what something is' is a metaphysical question and thereby likely to be simply meaningless. Much better is to realize *all* physical concepts are defined operationally: by how we measure them. This is just as true of energy as it is of mass, charge, spin, parity, momentum, angular momentum, etc.

Here's a question. What sort of answer is possible to the question 'what is energy'? Once again, the predictability obtained in science and the detail is far above what your wife does with the car. At some point 'knowing what something is' is the same as 'knowing how it works'.

I  disagree with you.  the vector comment is not what energy is.  The vector is modeling what energy does.  jut like they do not know what gravity is and they do not know what space/time is.  They have know idea why QM works.  energy is exactly like those three.  it is just  fact.  there is nothing we can do about it.  yet. 

You are answering metaphysical and thus meaningless.  I am saying its only metaphysical by definition and not meaningless.  It very meaningful and we are spending a lot of resources to find out what it means. 

why is it meaningless to you?  is everything you don't meaningless?