J.C.MacSwell

You seriously believe that there is as much observational evidence for black holes as there is for air?

...and those are pretty nice threads the Emperor is wearing

I hope you are kidding.

Setting aside the rest of your post this last bit may have some merit (IMO), though dismissing best scientific conjectures out of hand simply because they are not on as firm ground as accepted theories is hardly a more rational position.

The clash is with relativity/simultaneity; The problem is this "anywhere & everywhere at one & the same time" is frame dependant, yet consistency in all frames is still required. So which frames get to pull the plug on wave function "at one and the same time", and which ones must lag behind in some sectors of the frame while in fact anticipating it in others?

I think you would be better off in the same sense that, if looking for a tree from which to saw lumber to make a house, you would head for a known forrest, rather than close your eyes and grope randomly for a tree.

If you jump off a cliff, you accelerate at 9.8 m/s/s with respect to the Earth, but do not accelerate at all with respect to your natural path in space time. If you decide not to jump, you do not accelerate with respect to Earth, however, due to the continuing force on your feet at the top of the cliff, you continue to accelerate, deviating from your natural path in space time.

Photons do not have reference frames.

I'll add them to my Christmas list!

It does. Spaghettification is due to significant gradient in a gravitational field. You would feel it even in a box, free falling toward a sufficiently large mass. You would lose the bet if being accelerated sufficiently upward while on the moon, pinned to the upward accelerating gym floor.

What forces and energy was used to move the kids toward the center?

This sounds equivalent to an inelastic collision. The lost kinetic energy is transferred to thermal energy due to friction between the two discs as one slows down and one speeds up until they match speed.

Wouldn't it have to be infinitely hot, to radiate at infinite frequency, to be detectable to infinite precision?

Where did I mention weightlessness? You feel the force of your resistance to gravity, but that is your resistance not gravity. When you stop standing up, climbing etc, gravity has not gone away. If you jump from a cliff you do not feel gravity any more or less, just the recognition that you have stopped resisting...and when you land that's not gravity either that's a collision. Compare a free fall on the moon or on an Earth size planet with no atmosphere...you cannot tell the difference in the two even though the gravity is significantly stronger on the Earth Planet. You cannot feel it.

We feel gravity when we feel the first tugs of our upcoming spaghettification as we approach a black hole. On Earth we really don't feel it.

Ha! You can take away my magnets but you'll never take away my magnetism!

Yeah, I started building them myself and the oil companies all got together and shut down my supply of magnets. "No magnets for you...6 MONTHS!" is what they told me, so at that point I simply gave up. I tried to work a deal with Santa and the Easter Bunny to at least power toys for free, but apparently they have been coerced by the battery companies and so they refuse to take me seriously. I was so disgusted with them all that I even threw out the magnetic motors that were powering my automobile and generating my household electricity and went back to consuming fossil fuels like everyone else. At least I tried...

You can't expect the actual result to be. (I'm just throwing out my $.02, even if it might be overpriced, and taking "expected proportion" somewhat literally, as "most expected proportion") Does "expected proportion" have a defined meaning in statistics? (not my field) I don't assume it has one in brain teasers.

Still 50% is the most likely expectation

Since you could not have a half brow half blue cow, 50 or 51% is the most likely

Regardless of how little friction the system has, it has some. There must be air movement with respect to the water or road, not just the vehicle, to maintain or increase speed.

Which Bernoulli might that be?

I don't believe Dark Matter has been confirmed. It's conjectured as a hypothetical cause of a perceived effect. How is it definitely there?

So...we all agree that Nature is a lazy, but efficient, hard working but wasteful bastard?