swansont

Neutrinos are not affected by the magnetosphere.

If a nucleus has a 50% chance of decaying in 3 seconds, then the other 50% probability requires infinite time. The half-life is 3 seconds.

"But in these systems the laser switches the magnetic medium by warming it." So it's not that the magnetism is affected by light, it's that it's affected by temperature. The laser just allows for very localized heating.

Yes, you can do it. The dielectric constant of a vacuum is 1. Capacitance is inversely related to separation distance.

Immaterial. It only matters that energy is required.

Because that represents the speed of light. Once the decision was made to use c as the reference instead of a bar of iridium-platinum, they defined in terms of the best measurement of c, and then defined the value. It is true that the oringinal meter was defined to make the distance from equator to pole equal to 10,000 km. But they incorrectly accounted for the oblateness of the earth, so that ended up being incorrect. The wavelength, and then c definitions were adopted because the meter could be determined more accurately and precisely, just as the definition of the second was shifted to an atomic definition from being some fraction of the earth's rotation under some set of conditions. You also have the advantage that anybody with sufficient technology can realize the standard themselves, without having to go to Paris to compare with the world standard, or have the BIPM manufacture a new one for you.

Antimatter and Dark matter are not synonymous.

[nit]Those aren't acronyms. They're abbreviations. Acronyms form a word, like radar, or scuba.[/nit]

According to any inertial observer (say, floating far above the north pole) it will go in a straight line.

But do a thought experiment and make the separation larger or the rotation faster. At what point would it not hit "true?" And why would it not deviate until that point?

No, that's one of the strange things that confounds newcomers to relativity. The speed of light is the same for all inertial observers.

Not as far as I know. What reaction or particles did you think would occur/appear?

That's a key idea to think about. The rotating earth is not an inertial frame, so one has to be careful when applying special relativity ideas. The beam will be deflected because the target will have moved in the time it takes for the beam to get to the target. Won't be very much, as YT implied. But that really has nothing to do with preferred frames. If you align a laser, turn it off, then start moving the target when you turn it on again, you'll see the same thing, even if it's all in an inertial frame. In fact, a variation on that is how you can measure the speed of light.

I am not aware of an exlanation of spin in terms of waves, as it never seems to come up. Speaking of photons moving apart at 2c presupposes that you are in the frame of one of the photons. It's not a valid reference frame. The "interaction" is called entanglement, and has been discussed in other threads. Please read them.

The fact that they exchange photons and exert a force on each other means they are doing work on each other, if there is a net displacement. In GR light bends because the space is warped. PE in GR is a separate issue - mgh or GMm/r are classical formulae.

Length contaction and time dilation are direct consequences of c being finite. As TheProphet said, it's Lorentz contraction, and you observe it of others that are moving relative to you. You never measure it happening to yourself.

When you speak of "opposites attract, likes repel" it usually indicates ferromagnetism, aka "permanent" magnets. Ferromagnetism in materials is due to unpaired electron spin. Not all materials have unpaired electrons, and most materials are not ferromagnetic. Ferromagnetism isn't the only type. There is also diamagnetism and paramagnetism. Of the elements, iron, nickel and cobalt are ferromagnetic with curie points above room temperature, and gadolinium is right around room temperature. A couple other rare-earth elements are below room temp. The other types respond to external fields, either being attracted to or repelled by the external field, because of the response of the electrons to the external fields. Also, antimatter has been created in a lot of places other than CERN. And trapping ions or charges is pretty trivial. Even neutral atoms, under the right conditions, can be stored in magneto-optic or magnetic traps.

Because they're crackpots?

EPR. The photons are entangled, and this has been discussed at length in other threads. No information travels faster than c.

Bound state energies are. Free states are a continuum.

Note that adsorption and absorption are different phenomena. You meant absorption.

Right - the magnetic energy doesn't just go away. What would happen is that you would lose the dipole, but gain higher-order multipoles.

I am speculating that you misread the statement. Unless it's "recognized" in the same way that the National Enquirer is a very recognized news magazine.