MigL

You're being a bit harsh, Strange. The Daily Mail is the only credible news source for anything Harry/Meghan or Kim/Kanye related.

Control ( of greed ). Flooding the market with crappy movies, just to capitalize and make money. And ruining the legacy of the originals. Since the first three, I've only liked Rogue One. ( then again I was always a Star Trek guy )

If you were to replace the 'square' potential in the 'particle in a box' solution with a Coulomb potential, you would get the Hydrogen atom solution. The proton is not involved at all; only its potential well.

The US is a big country, INow, with differing demographics. The preferences of delegates in one state may not coincide with those of another. You make it sound like the race is over after just getting out of the starting blocks. If there's one thing I've learned over the last three years, it's that American politics has become full of surprises. How else to explain the popularity of arguably the worst POTUS ever. D Trump is polling at almost 50 % approval; higher than B Obama at the same point in his Presidency. All while in the midst of an impeachment trial. Whomever Democrats pick as their Presidential candidate, they had better make sure he/she can defeat D Trump. Otherwise, no matter how 'lofty' ( or lefty ) their platform, they will only be the runner up.

I would assume it is the superposition of the quarks that is collapsed by the interactions. The proton itself can still remain in a superposition of its own states. After all, an atom can be in a superposition of states, yet its constituent electrons are continuously interacting with its nucleus. EDIT: cross posted with your response to Swansont. The wave function describing all possible observables of an atom ( say Hydrogen to keep it simple ) does not consider the proton in the nucleus at all, just the potential arising from its presence, and how the electron is affected by it. It is after all, solely the electron 'configuration' that determines how the atom interacts with other atoms.

Keep in mind that your light cone diagram is translating upward towards the future at 1 sec per sec. Also you cannot directly observe past events, as your 'now' would have to move back down to the time of the event. So it is not so much that the light signal has passed you by, as you can see the remnants of the past event, or the space where it used to be; Time has moved forward for the event also.

I know quite a few people whose mouths are faster than their brain... ( not implying that about anyone here )

I hope you weren't one of the factors in the 'vote reporting mess' that still hasn't given verified results. Apparently it won't be till later today, before all votes are collected. You Americans always have trouble with any kind of election. If it's not hanging chads, it's reporting inconsistencies.

Wasn't the cadet who led the team on the dangerous maneuver that killed one of the other cadets, and who afterwards wanted to cover it up, 'Tom' Paris ? Who was later spun-off into Star Trek : Voyager. Maybe it wasn't the name .

You could do it with a digital ( computer ) model, where all the needed parameters, and their response to stresses could be programmed.

To re-create the collapse, not only do you need to build it to scale, but the properties of the materials used need to be appropriate for the masses involved. Otherwise you will not have the mass to cause the floor-by-floor collapse exhibited by the actual buildings. And you need to be able to vary those material properties in response to the selective heating of the burning aviation fuel. It is not as simple as building a scale model. It is an extremely complex problem and I don't think anyone will be claiming the million Euros. Unless of course, they do a half-a*s job of the simulation, and then use those results to claim that the towers were brought down by the Government, with explosives on each floor ( Out of sequence ? ). Exactly what's needed, more misinformation to feed conspiracy theorists. EDIT: X-posted with Swansont

Seems that those Republican Senators may have no backbone, but they can sure be mean and vindictive. M Romney is already being 'punished' for voting according to conscience. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/31/romney-cpac-impeachment-110143 I guess the rest of the Senators prefer NOT to have any information ( witness testimony ) when making a decision.

If your criteria is efficiency ( the least amount of energy expended ), then best results are obtained by closely matching the velocity of the jet efflux to the speed of the squid through the water. At slow squid speed, a slow jet efflux is desirable; as squid speed increases, so should jet efflux speed for maximizing efficiency. You will notice propeller aircraft are most efficient below about 400 mph; very low speed of air accelerated backwards. Airliners with large turbofans are more efficient in the 400 to 600 mph range; large fans with slow moving jet efflux. Military aircraft are low bypass or straight turbojet, and are efficient supersonically up to about M3-4; small fans with fast jet efflux. Rockets or Scramjets ( no moving parts to slow airflow ) can be more efficient from M5 up; really fast jet efflux.

Only within a radius of causality. Which is defined by the distance and c .

The fact that we can't observe them yet, is due to the fact that light travels at the maximum speed of information in this universe. Which means that if we can't observe them at that speed, no other information can reach us any faster. IOW we can't be affected in any way.

You keep throwing 'future' into the mix. I don't see where that comes from, as there is no mechanism for looking into the future. Anytime you look into distance, you are looking into the past, because light takes one second to travel 186000 miles. If you look out your window at your neighbour cutting the lawn, you are 'seeing' him nanoseconds in the past. But the opposite is NOT true ! When he looks at you and waves, he is NOT looking into the future back at you; he is also looking nanoseconds into the past. His past. Which is different from yours.

Kinetic and gravitational time dilation. Mass-energy equivalence. Bending of light due to gravity. Neutron stars and Black Holes. Gravitational waves. Frame dragging. ETC. All have been observed and verified. Yet we still get people coming here claiming A Einstein was wrong .

In Strange's example, the lighting flash ( light) moves faster than the thunder ( sound ). You worry that no information gets to us faster than the visual image of distant galaxies. You seem like an intelligent guy... Exactly what do you think will move faster than the light from these far-away galaxies ? And if any information could, would that not break causality ?

IIRC fast food chains 'bleach' quite a few of their products. Don't recall where I read it, but McDonald's onions for their burgers are 'bleached', I believe. As are the reconstituted potatoes that the use, to shape into French fries. Not sure about the 'water pressure' stripped chicken that they reconstitute into chicken nuggets. By the way Stringy, did you read the new forum rule that you have to be a member of the EU to participate in this forum ? ( joking, always good to hear from you ) You guys are officially out now. Do you feel 'liberated' from those continentals now ?

Interestingly if you reduce space-time to two dimensions, as in the 'stretched trampoline with a bowling ball in the center' analogy, you do get sinusoidal waves spiraling outwards. As in this video simulation : https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=quadrupole+waves&&view=detail&mid=38596A8CBDA754CE970238596A8CBDA754CE9702&&FORM=VRDGAR&ru=%2Fvideos%2Fsearch%3Fq%3Dquadrupole%2Bwaves%26FORM%3DHDRSC3

I hope all you Americans remember all the Republican Senators who chose to kiss a*s instead of doing the right thing. Amazing that only two of them had any backbone. Hopefully when Bolton's book comes out the voters will see how much the Rep Senators chose to cover up.

No, not similar to sine waves at all. You could picture them as alternating stretching and compressing of space-time in the vertical and horizontal, about the axis which is the direction of travel. Google quadrupole wave Interestingly, A Einstein predicted their existence, based on GR, in 1916. But They were first proposed by H Poincare in 1905.

If you can accept the fact that 'now' is observer dependent, and each observer( next to you, or on other planets ) has their own "now' because of the finite speed of light and causality considerations, then it becomes easy to explain. If you are looking at a galaxy 1 Billion LY away, you see it 1 Billion years in the past. If you had a telescope that would allow you to see the aliens measurements/calculations, you would see them estimate the universe to be 12.7 billion years old. If you could do the same at 5 Billion LY distance you would see another group of aliens estimating an age of 8.7 Billion years. This is, of course, disregarding strong gravitational influence.

Weight is a measure of force, and force has a direction. Underwater we are subject to a down force just as on land, and an additional upward buoyancy force. The downward force is reduced by the upward force, so the net force, or weight, is reduced. Its mass remains unchanged. Edit : ( I'm at a much simpler level than Markus )

Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, which states that for a brief enough period of time, the energy of a particle, system, or even a volume of space, can be a range of values, as long as the Heisenberg inequality is satisfied.