J.C.MacSwell

Pre-quantum, but for purposes here it does not include relativity. That's just from experience (here), and thus the separate thread for relativity.

The keel provides the force component in the upwind direction

I voted yes, since that would be correct when they were operating as designed.

Bulbous bows are used to reduce wave making drag by getting the leading portion of the form deeper below the surface.

So your item will in fact heat up, just as you would feel the heat of the sun on your face looking through a pane of glass...and when it does it will radiate, but have that radiation reflected back.

Most keels would have slightly less drag at 0 degrees of attack if sharpened somewhat. They are generally optimized (most lift for least drag) for the amount of leeway the sailboat might have while going upwind in the typical conditions the sailboat is designed for. Razor sharp is not an advantage even at 0 degrees as it requires more surface area for the same form drag (therefore more drag overall due to higher skin friction). It also creates turbulence (more drag, less lift) at very small angles of attack, and will stall sooner (turbulence created will not reattach) leading to high drag and poor lift.

The rolling motion of a wheel, on a surface that allows traction, is self stabilizing. It will naturally turn toward the side it might lean, which will tend to straighten it up. This is not just a gyroscopic effect. Compare a wheel on ice or very slippery surface which will much more easily fall over. Steering can add (or subtract) from this effect and of course a non-moving bicycle essentially has no steerage. (there are techniques for staying upright, but it is much more difficult)

Neoprene is fairly common and should work well. EPDM that you mention above is better in some environments. Make sure whatever you pick is good for the environment (temperature, chemical, UV etc) you are using it in. Check with a supplier or corrosion guide.

If you look carefully, the green 24% and yellow 73% are referred to as "not accounted for". I think that might be the deficit referred to. Just my $0.02. I'll let others come up with the rest of the money.

You can increase the vacuum (lower the pressure) but not the vacuum power.

I did. I know it bounces back, but it has potential to "reach" 3.1 when it returns (c.g.) to 3.0. since it has a diameter of 20 cm. It is, after all, touching 3.1 at the start. Post #5 really only pertains to the horizontal displacement... ...and we are in the brain teasers & puzzles section.

The ball will reach 3.1 metres

An atom of hydrogen would not have a defined temperature. If you heat something up the mass increases and that mass would be considered in any gravitational effect calculation.

...well for having a cup of tea, you have your fluid dynamics, your heat transfer... ...and of course some finite suffering and pain if it is too hot... ...so for the OP, more of that and for longer...

The simplest formula generally is that the buoyant force is equal to the displacement (weight of volume of water displaced) It means it could be anywhere in the fluid. Unless a change in pressure changes the density of the object it will tend to stay where it is, or continue on it's path. It has neutral buoyancy.

regular old water is 10 lb per regular old gallon What do you need it for?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclic_model

I think... therefore I sweet potato.

Luxury! I used to live in a paper bag...

That's it. Not that the clocks are right. Essentially they are reading the signallers time, not there own. So the clocks tend to agree, even if they accumulate an increasing error for their location (+ or - depending on location) That's it. Not that the clocks are right. Essentially they are reading the signallers time, not there own. So the clocks tend to agree, even if they accumulate an increasing error for their location (+ or - depending on location) I guess the GPS gets tuned to "Earth time" (lapse) not it's own.

Statistically speaking, that's probably the most likely scenario: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/science/15brain.html?em&ex=1200718800&en=0aad49ca807c848f&ei=5087%0A

I don't see the difference. The incoming signal is received at different frequencies but the time elapsed at each location compensates. So the clocks are kept in synch. After 10 (or 10,000,000) signals/cycles only the signal lag of the last signal, including any relativistic effects, will effect the difference in the clocks. Once received, each will have received 10 (or 10,000,000) signals/cycles

My interpretation of the proposed scenario: The remote driver of the signal is driving the two clocks.Their time can vary but the difference cannot accumulate. If the two clocks were proper time clocks for their respective locations the difference would accumulate, but they are constantly adjusted ("incorrected") to match within signal time and 1 cycle time differences by the remote driver.

These effects should cancel with that of the proper time elapse of each location.They would both be constantly "incorrected" to match each other, and never get far out of synch with each other.

At some point the gravitational attraction of the Earth becomes insignificant to the extended column of water. So the question is closer to "what is the pressure of an infinite column of water 10 X 10 meters?" and adjust locally for the Earth as it may still be highest at the "bottom". Without doing the math I would hazard a guess that it converges to a limit, and does not create a black hole.