MigL

Is the question more specific ? Are you just submerging the bag of crisps, or placing it under a considerable depth with a much increased pressure ? And don't ruin a perfectly good bag of crisps, as Country Boy suggests.

Are you sure about that Strange ? A rest ( invariant ) mass can never be reduced, while a relativistic ( variant ) mass, can be reduced to zero in certain frames. While I realize that the energy-momentum, the variant component of an invariant mass in motion, must have an effect, it can lead to troublesome conclusions. You could, arguably, have a large enough variant component that, a relativistically moving object, collapses gravitationally in one frame, while it doesn't in its rest frame ( credit to Swansont for pointing this out numerous times ). As a matter of fact, even the gravitational field itself must add another component to the stress energy-momentum tensor in the equation. It seems 'mass' isn't that easy to define in GR. Maybe Mordred or Markus can explain how variant and invariant masses are differently treated by GR. ( I have heard of ADM mass, and even Comar mass, related to Bondi energy, but have no understanding )

Must have been. Entry into the US from Canada is much more difficult these days,when drugs are involved. We Canadians are pretty well baked most of the time since weed was legalized. ( just kidding, I don't even smoke regular cigarettes )

I always assumed members of the Royal family were citizens of ALL Commonwealth countries. And wouldn't the best representative of the Queen in Canada be her very grandson ?

If the pump can create a suction, it has very tight tolerances. IOW it is not a flow fed pump. So if the pump isn't pumping, there will be very little flow, due to the tight tolerances. Try to read in context; not isolated groups of words.

OK, one last time... If the pump stops pumping there might be some flow, depending on the kind of pump, but usually if the pump can create a suction, therw will be very little. That is the amount of momentum that is imparted to the tote as a result of pressure flow ( in the opposing direction, of course ). When the pump is pumping, there is a large mass flow of water, at a much greater rate. That is the amount of momentum that is imparted to the pump, as a result of pump flow. One is almost negligible compared to the other.

Congratulations ! Have one for me too.

This forum is like the mob, Dim . "Everytime you try to get out, they keep pulling you back in." ( the only good part of Godfather III )

You may be right. But remember what they say about 'nice guys' who take the high road. Let's hope the Democrats don't 'finish last' in the election.

You realise that a Jet engine is basically an air pump, don't you ? A large turbofan engine has a low pressure in front of it and a higher pressure behind the large fan ( from which it gets most of its thrust ). This air that it accelerates backwards provides an equal reaction foreward on the engine ( which is attached to the plane ) Now I could say, get a pump, and see how it behaves. But I'm sure you've seen planes flying.

The purpose of Foreign Aid should not either; but it was. And then the POTUS attempted to obstruct the investigation. The purpose of Impeachment is to remove him from office. The election would be a valid way.

The relationship is simple... F=ma The force is exerted by that which causes the acceleration. If the water is accelerated by the pump, it is the pump which feels the 'equal and opposite reaction'.

As wallflash said he wasn't either, and offered several times to 'drop it', maybe it is time we all moved on.

Even so, it takes something as massive as the Sun to 'bend' light by miniscule amounts ( seconds of arc ). For an elementary particle such as an electron, to bend light into a loop around it, it would need to be massive enough to throw up an event horizon and have a photosphere, as Markus points out. In effect, a mini Black Hole. Now BH mechanics are increasingly well understood. If you fire something at them, they absorb the incoming mass-energy and become larger. Elementary particles instead, scatter and produce additional particles from the kinetic energy. This is what I meant by "How will your assertions affect Physics ?". Your assertions seem to change tings in ways that DO NOT fit observation. You really want to keep going with this ???

You are, of course, your own person Zap. I will not be telling you what to do or say. My opinion of you will not change, I still respect and seek out your opinion on various subjects, and you guys are as close as friends I've never met, can be. Having a differing point of view, will not affect my opinion of people ( I still miss Ten oz ). I'm simply offering my opinion. it does seem some of us are too quick to be offended by wallflash's accusations, and even ready to prejudge his motives. Maybe ( just maybe ) the accusations he made are a little too close for comfort.

So he is offended by you saying STFU; as is his right, because 'offence' is perceived. And you are offended by him telling you this, and you want to tell him STFU; as is your right, for the exact same reason. Thereby proving him right ? edit: I hope I'm not offending you by pointing this out .

I can't help but feel that, had the House held on to the articles of Impeachment a few more months, all this crap would be fresher in voter's minds come the November election; although I don't know if that was a possibility. D Trump will not be removed by the Senate, and, after the summer, all of his supporters will have forgotten all about the Impeachment proceedings, and will be back behind him 100 %. Politics seems to have a very short memory.

The mechanism for the coin slowing down as it circles the horn at the zoo, is well understood. By what mechanism does a photon slow down in a gravitational well ? Can it slow down ? And how does that affect Physics as we know it ?

Come on, guys. You are making his argument. Unless you think calling someone obtuse, or accusing someone of making invalid points in his 'various' threads ( he has one other ), not supporting his assertions, and calling him out as a troll, is civil behavior. His OPINIONS of behavior are valid to him; making excuses with semantics does not render them invalid. You guys are doing a splendid job of supporting his assertions; he doesn't need to. And since when is calling someone out as a troll evidence of civil behavior ? We have in the past, had this conversation numerous times, and the consensus has always been 'Offence is in the eye of the beholder' He may well feel offended by our behavior, yet we are telling him that we are NOT being offensive. There is a certain double standard at play here, by some of the very people ( whom I respect and consider friends ) who made the strongest case for the above consensus.

Minimal, and due solely to head ( height of liquid ) pressure. I'll put it another way... Say you are an astronaut floating in space while holding a bucket full of rocks. You take rocks out of the bucket, and toss them behind you. Does the bucket experience forward acceleration, out of your hand, or do you, the astronaut ? ( in this case the bucket would be the tote, and the astronaut would be the pump )

Interesting, but... The premise of Primordial Black Holes being responsible for the detected Gravitational waves, is that they can range in size from "a thousand times less massive than the sun to a billion times larger, they could make up all of the universe’s dark matter". However, PBHs much smaller than a solar mass have definite lifetimes. The smallest would have already evaporated after 13.7 billion years; and certain specific sizes would be evaporating at this time. When you combine this with the fact that we can look' back' through time at the precedent billions of years by looking billions of light years away, one has to wonder how come we don't see any evidence o PBH evaporation, and the final, tell-tale gamma ray burst, as they 'pop' out of their event horizon in their final moments.

Definitely not a mathematical game, but certainly a mathematical tool. You could specify a particular volume, but that wouldn't be unique. That is why we specify length, width, and height if we need better precision, as two equal volumes may be shaped differently. And to uniquely identify a particular volume, we specify the (x,y,z) co-ordinates ( in cartesian, or radius and angles in spherical polar ) that designate its volume about the arbitrary origin. We similarly use 2dimensional co-ordinates for a specific area, and an 1dimensional co-ordinate for a distance from the origin

My viewpoint is that it is the pump generating the vacuum on the inlet, By accelerating the water. So it is the pump that will feel the countereffect. I have previously used a diaphragm pump ( positive displacement ), and if not properly fixed, you can see the pump 'dance' as it is pumping. You could alternatively, feed the pomp from the top opening of the tote, with a dip-leg. Wold you then expect the tote to be accelerated down, and get weigh more, as you are pumping water out of it ?

If I may... The fact that JEDEC certifies standards for the connectors and cabling of things like Ethernet ports, Memory sticks, etc., is similar to the standardised connector and cabling regulations for your EV charging station. JEDEC is not telling you when, or in what priority, you can use your Ethernet or memory.

The tote, on its own, would feel a trivial force due to redirecting the flow due to gravity. It is the ( isolated ) pump which is setting up the pumping condition ( suction on inlet/pressure of outlet ). It does this by exerting a force on the water ( whether by centrifugal or positive displacement means ), imparting an acceleration to it, and a change in momentum. Conservation of momentum then requires the water to do the same to the pump in the opposite direction. I am interested in any arguments opposing this view, though; so if you have one, I'd be glad to discuss it.