swansont

Which they’ve admitted to, multiple times.

But we have a condition you have defined as not in equilibrium. A system being less than the sum of its parts.

If you’ve had to take time off for other things, like being sick or hurt, one more day might be a luxury.

But atoms reduce mass to form a stable state. ADS is wrong.

The trend says no, since Trump never takes responsibility fir anything bad.

Also a way of controlling people. “Follow the rules now and things will be better when you die”

Why do you assume that people making minimum wage and working more than one job can afford to take a half a day (or more) off to get an ID?

Go for it.

That assumption is a big part of the problem.

So I have an atom, whose mass is less than the sum of its parts (individual neutrons, protons, electrons). You say this atom will change until equilibrium is reached?

A birth certificate as a photo ID doesn’t seem feasible

Same specs? i.e. it’s a drop-in replacement?

Lead-acid batteries cost less (up-front cost)

What does this even mean? What are a and b? States of a system, or two objects/systems? What does “Or more” refer to?

This is less than illuminating.

Should be, but aren’t Does anybody issue IDs without requiring renewal? I have an ID for work, a driver’s license and a passport. All of them have expiration dates.

It wasn’t the only one. (The behavior Strange is anticipating is “post trivialities until I’m allowed to post links”)

If voting were 24/7, the lines wouldn’t be so bad. But you still have people congregating, so you’re trading one problem for another, similar problem. You’re just asserting that it takes minutes. You think the same people closing polling places are going to make this easy? How do you get a government-issued ID? You go somewhere (not always close by) and wait in line. The same people affected by not having time or easy access with voting lines are affected by the ID procurement process.

What if you don't have a car? How do you get your ID?

Plus good and bad are subjective. Making them situationally dependent sound a lot like having the ability to define them so that your premise works, no matter what.

! Moderator Note No, that approach will not fly here, especially considering the consequences. ! Moderator Note "Free exchange" of information that is known to be wrong does not advance a conversation.

You need to learn about torque and angular momentum, which are the rotational analogues of force and linear momentum. You tend to get rotation when you have extended bodies interacting off-axis (i.e. straight-on collisions don't have rotations, but hitting away from the center-of-mass for something that's not spherical will, or the situation you describe, where you have a force at a distance, and you aren't constrained to one dimension)

Do you have anything of substance to add? I mean, do you have evidence that Trump doesn't have a financial stake, when the reporting is that he does? Yes, it's small, and this won't move the needle, but there is a substantial track record of Trump funneling money to himself so it's not unreasonable IMO to have raised the question. If all you have is "bias!" then please go vent somewhere else. All this whining is giving me a headache. (To me the more likely motivation is that if it pans out, he's hailed as a hero. Nothing more than his narcissism in play)

Why does the photon "expand" while it's traveling, rather than just being emitted at a longer wavelength? Why does the photon take longer to be absorbed? Does it take longer for an atom to absorb a photon from a receding source, than from a stationary one, with the photons at the same frequency in the absorber’s frame? What if we just measure one photon? Your definition depends on there being many photons to measure. As Strange has noted, this is power. Can you derive the Doppler formula from your conjecture? Which definition of v appears in it?

we already have a definition for speed. Call it something else. Relativity has beat you to the notion. We already know that the frequency depends on the frame of reference, and I’m not the first to point this out. Repeating an explanation/analogy without responding to questions about it is poor form