swansont

Yes, but that's part of the point. All things are not equal in this effect.

Do you have any credible sources that equate dark energy with quantum fluctuations?

In general, yes, you can tap into stored energy of a magnetic field. But in a permanent magnet I don't think it's so easy, because you'd have to be able to re-orient the domains to do so.

Sticking to a magnetic floor doesn't simulate gravity for the whole body, so you'd still have the muscle atrophy and bone loss problems. It's not really different than a tether.

Here is much of what I do, when I'm not pushing papers around my desk.

I have generally better toys at work than I do at home.

That's the atomic mass unit you are defining, not the electron mass. There are Avogadro's number of amu's in a gram.

But there are issues with e.g. galaxies not rotating at the right speed for their observed mass. This is why dark matter has been hypothesized. The problem, AFAIK, is that assuming mass for the exchange particle does not solve the problems, or introduces others. (Math markups do not seem to be currently working)

Each atom or molecule has a certain probabilityof absorbing a photon. Typically this results in an exponential decay of the intensity with distance. the laser is distinctive and bright enough that you can see the light, plus there is re-emission (as was mentioned) when a molecule de-excites. It works in the hands because they are relatively thin. You'll get the same effect with a flashlight, but the light will be red.

You probably want the mass, rather than the weight. You can do a Millikan oil drop experiment and use qE=mg Or do an electron beam deflection and use m = er2B2/2V (derived in the link)

Again, "under some circumstances" has to be appended. Your statement is not an absolute truth.

No. There will always be friction. You can't get around the second law of thermodynamics, not even with a good lawyer.

Unless there's a lot of evaporation, so that the amount of water that has to freeze is less, and that allows it to "catch up" to the colder cup.

It is often used in the negative. As in "the numbers don't jibe," meaning the numbers don't agree. (It is also often mis-spoken as "to jive." )

It also means "To be in accord; agree"

Only to first order, and certainly not as v approaches c.