MigL

A classical particle can be localized, a wave cannot. Even an elephant has a deBroglie wavelength. It is exceedingly small, because it is equivalent to h/(m*v), and as such we don't even consider it.

Meanwhile his Press Secretary, and staunch defender, has vote by mail 12 times in the last 12 elections... https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kayleigh-mcenany-vote-by-mail-record-comments-absentee/ I guess he's learned this from all his dictator friends that he idolizes. The first step to becoming a despot, is control of the media. https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/other/trump-is-set-to-announce-an-executive-order-against-social-media-companies/ar-BB14HYNa?ocid=msedgntp

Interesting... One of the formulations for Black Hole evaporation, involves virtual particles, which go on to become Hawking radiation, 'tunneling' through the Event Horizon. ( a classically impossible situation ) I have always wondered if quantum particles would also be able to 'tunnel' through the light cone separating time-like and space-like movement, and, for brief instants anyway, achieving superluminal speeds and violating causality.

I've never owned a pool and I'm not a chemist ( disclaimer ). I've always thought that a pool's pH is kept at a point that is optimal for the 'shock', or oxidizer, that keeps pool water clear. A strong caustic would be used to bring the pH to that optimal range, and buffering would be used to keep the pH from 'wondering' about. Otherwise the oxidizer would break down too quickly, and you would have trouble keeping oxidizer level in a safe range.

Some of our properties ( and of our constituents ) can be described by a wave model ( and associated probability distributions ).

Nice explain, Markus. Reminds me of QM, where one can take advantage of symmetry in the Hydrogen atom, in spherical polar co-ordinates to reduce the 2nd order partial differential equation and get exact answers. But as soon as asymmetries are included, like you get with multi-electron systems of Helium and higher, the equations become intractable, and must be handled by numerical methods. with the number of EFEs the situation is probably a few orders of magnitude harder in GR. On the 'bright side' ... , the OP's stubbornness to abandon his simplistic idea, has allowed for a lot of these teaching/learning opportunities. And the rest of us who choose to seriously consider the information presented by you, Mordred, and others, are 'richer' for it.

I'm located at 43.16 N latitude. Last week we had frost warnings at night, so I hadn't taken my lemon tree outdoors yet. This week, after bringing it outside, we've had three days of 35 deg C temperatures so far ( I remember when we had a Spring and fall ). The delicate new growth ( after pruning in March ) is having a tough time adapting to the sudden heat. No doubt there will be considerable adaptation involved with dealing with AGW, but it won't be easy. And losses will vastly outweigh the benefits.

If you consider the TWO masses as parts of the system, then the energy of the system is increased, and so the contribution to the energy density of the system is increased. The system, as a whole, will have a larger gravitational potential, but I don't think the 'attraction' between the individual members of the system will change. ( I could be wrong, but if Markus says the calculations are not trivial, don't expect me to do them ) Gravity is an additional source of gravity, simply because gravity is self-coupling, due to the non-linearity of the EFEs. IOW gravity gravitates. BUT there is no such thing asanti-gravity.

For the specific system where the kinetic energy is evenly 'spread out' over the system, then there is a contribution to the energy density. It contributes to ED because it is describing a system that has a higher temperature than the reference system. Not motion of the system. Seemed simple enough to follow...

You guys remind me of the 'architect' in The Matrix: Reloaded. He explains to Neo how they constructed a perfect version of the Matrix, but humans refused to accept it. It was only by the introduction of the anomaly, where humans are given the impression that they have choice, that the imperfect version of the Matrix was accepted. Yeah, I get all my Philosophy from movies...

Please point out where I suggested that, Dim. And the 'seriousness' of the situation is NOT the topic of the OP ( hopefully we all agree on that ), rather it is 'alarmist' ( whatever we choose that to mean ) hyperbole, of which Ken provided an example before he clarified his position. So I would say, I'm on topic; you're not !

As I said, I don't want to undermine the seriousness of AGW, but you must understand that there cannot be runaway CO2 release and associated global heating. The 'tipping point' that you mentioned, would have to be at least 40X higher than today's CO2 levels, as we know the Earth has come down from those levels. IOW, we have been much higher in the past, and the conditions did not diverge. We may still become extinct as a species, along with many other species, that fail to adapt, but eventually the Earth will again trap the excess CO2 ( as it did in the past ) through increased plant growth ( and other mechanisms ), and find a similar equilibrium. So there is no ratchet mechanism that prevents return, and the Earth cannot become like Venus ( or any other planet )

Well, if you have a so-so vacuum, where you still have enough gas present, to create some pressure when heated, you have a Crookes radiometer, and the vanes spin away from the dark side ( gas pressure driven ). If you have a really good vacuum ( and very low friction set-up ), you have a Nichols radiometer, and the vanes spin away from the light side ( light momentum driven ). I can't really give you values for the vacuum at which the 'switch' occurs as there would be a 'few' variables involved. ( thanks Strange, for supplying the name of the Nichols radiometer )

Not just one twit, Stringy. Apparently the US has a whole lot of twits; some masquerading as medical experts. The American Association of Physicians and Surgeons is also lobbying for increased prescribing of Hydroxychloroquine. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/24/hydroxychloroquine-trump-us-doctors-coronavirus The AAPS has previously claimed that HIV may not cause AIDS, that abortion causes breast cancer, that vaccines are linked to autism, and even that B Obama used hypnosis to trick voters. My first thoughts on reading this article was that maybe the AAPS is a comedy group...

Waterloo is generally regarded as the better university for Math/Science/Engineering. But Western is also quite good, and London is a beautiful town. You won't go wrong with either choice. You are essentially asking others to pick your preference. Keeping in mind that you could go to the best University in the world, but if you aren't interested in your course of studies, you will do poorly or drop out. Pick the one that offers what interests YOU

Sooooo No ratchet.

I don't want to undermine the seriousness of AGW. I recently watched the BBC Walking with Monsters/Dinosaurs/Beasts/Cavemen, as suggested in another thread. Apparently at one time CO2 levels were up to 40 times higher than they are today. Was the ratcheting mechanism broken back then, or is this hyperbole that illustrates the premise of the OP ?

Yes! (You often see it explained as the force of the light hitting it, but that is wrong and you are right) Not to b a stickler... But that is only accurate for partial pressures/vacuum. Once you get to an appreciably good vacuum, heating ( on the dark side ) is no longer the driver, as there is no gas pressure due to heating. It is radiation pressure on the silvered side ( if the spindle has low enough friction ) that forces the plates to act like solar sails would in space, and it will rotate in the opposite direction. So this too, depends on what you are trying to accomplish, as the results would be opposite for differing vacuum.

I was only kidding about wanting your opinion Markus. You didn't have to dump 50 lines of text on us ! No seriously. your openness/ candor are appreciated as much as your scientific insights . Thank you.

The pretreatment for high purity gas cylinders ( 99.9996 % pure ) involves baking under high vacuum for 12-24 hours. That is one of the reasons people are asking about your experimental set-up and objectives.

So someone gave you an answer that you 'like', because it doesn't make you feel inadequate. Not necessarily the right answer ) And you feel the need to shit on people who are having difficulty understanding your ill-posed question ? That's a drama queen. You are welcome to shut the door on your way out, if you don't appreciate it here.

Gases/vapors do get trapped in solid materials, like glass or metal. The 'off-gassing', or liberation of these trapped gases/vapors can take quite a while, as small amounts are liberated very slowly. The first 95% of the pressure drop will occur rather quick, but that last little bit could take days. One way to speed up the off-gassing is by raising the temperature high enough to drive out moisture and the like.

If you already have an answer to your question , why do you keep reposting on different sites ? And if you know that I'm wrong, or misinterpreted your question, why are you still going on about it, drama queen ?

A bound state is almost always a lower energy state than the 'free' state. ( one exception, off the top of my head, are nucleon states for Iron, 26, or higher ) So when an electron is 'captured' into a bound state, the excess energy is released as EMR. If the electron affinity is not there, because the valence shell is adequately populated, you need to supply energy to bind an electron. Not sure exactly what your question is, so difficult to answer accordingly.

No. It is just another frame of reference. Say the train wasn't moving, but the station was moving relative to the train. And the lighting strike didn't occur 'simultaneously ( whatever that means ) to the 'stationary' ( whatever that means ) observers on the train... Would "the digital timer presented on the same screen as the home video is being showed on the television, as seen by many other people observe the home video on screen they will all observe the same time based on the digital timer presented on the home video" and see simultaneous lighting flashes ? And is it still an 'absolute' frame ? Do you not see that all frames are equally valid to observers in that frame ? Do you not see that you can't claim one is special, or absolute ?