J.C.MacSwell

I don't think that is correct. Assuming you are stationary wrt each other you will agree on simultaneity and what is the present in that frame, even if spatially separated. The lag due to the limitations of lightspeed doesn't change that agreement. If you view a star that's stationary wrt you 5 light years away you see it 5 years in the past (and they you), but you both agree on what the present is (despite your inability to see the other's current present for another 5 years)

LOL. He was lucky to recover from that one!

Agree. Nobody does (did) it better...(even if that's from a Roger Moore Bond film) As a kid, he went to the same boys club in Edinburgh as a couple of my uncles.

For thought experiments you can break some, and maintain others, even sometimes without running into a logical contradiction. Not that reality would agree with the conclusions...

Aren't they both, roughly speaking, in the same frame? They each see each other 4.3 years in the past, and are unable to see each other in the present. So if they (impossibly as we generally accept physics, wormholes aside) make a leap spatially so that they maintain that present and now see it...how does that put them in the future?

Neither. You moved (impossibly) on the "grid", but as described you simply did it all in the same frame . Points A, C, and B are all in the same frame and you moved spatially only in that frame. You would have travelled forward or backward in time in some other frames, but not in that one. So you travelled in time relative to neither star.

So...no equivalent to FTL shortcut?

So is the context of the suggested antics of Trump. Not to be confused with the rest of them. Not at all. His policies aren't even as bad as his leadership, rallies, and other example he sets, IMO. So to the degree that could be true, I would hope there might be some changes prior to his leaving office in January. At the very least he won't be holding mass rallies.

But as President elect it might carry more weight? And Trump's antics less during the lame duck period?

Yes, but in that case there might be a prefix missing somewhere in the definition. 😃

Post Trump or post election?

What were they before turning pro or getting to the point of becoming an Olympic hopeful? Exercisers? How about their peers at that time that didn't go as far but hoped to. Most high school athletes, for instance, would consider themselves athletes.

Assuming Biden is the clear winner at some point next week, how is the coronavirus control effort going to look going forward? Will there be much of a change in the next couple months while Trump is still POTUS? (assuming no vaccine becoming available during that time)

Gotta admit. I had to check out what your other post said...

There's a reason the term "identity politics" carries lot's of baggage, and "embracing diversity" has positive connotations. What I described I wouldn't consider "identity politics", though I realize others might.

Respectfully where possible. Recognize and stop the political weaponization of it. One can call out white supremacy without calling everyone who might consider voting for Trump as supporting it, and one can embrace diversity without condoning or participating in the worst aspects of it. Democrats using identity politics rings hollow for you because you feel the Republicans do it more?

You need a third party that rejects both.

They're actually quite common....as long as nothing is on them. ...and I'll see myself out....😄

I give him at least a pass on that one (note that this is policy not rhetoric) 2-Not particularly enamoured by the Dems either So i'm 4-2 or 2-1. I think it would be best (read least worst) if he lost just decisively enough that the decision is clear democratically. Hopefully by not so much that the Democrats see it as an endorsement of their identity politics, but that's probably not possible...if they win through the electoral college they no doubt dominate the popular vote.

Sorry. I read that as permanent magnets. I guess the answer would be that permanent batteries cannot exist.

That would make it a perpetual motion machine of the third kind. An idealized frictionless mechanism that cannot actually exist. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion#:~:text=A perpetual motion machine of,thermal energy into mechanical work. A perpetual motion machine of the third kind is usually (but not always)[15][self-published source] defined as one that completely eliminates friction and other dissipative forces, to maintain motion forever due to its mass inertia (Third in this case refers solely to the position in the above classification scheme, not the third law of thermodynamics). It is impossible to make such a machine,[16][17] as dissipation can never be completely eliminated in a mechanical system, no matter how close a system gets to this ideal (see examples in the Low Friction section).

Very much so. All that energy is conserved. It just degrades over time into a form less able to do work, generally as heat.

This would also depend on how thick and heat conductive the paint is. A thinner coat would be better as the copper is more conductive.

True...also done in the past without science...

I hear he has quite an arm...