MigL

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.

This is one of the most interesting threads on AGW in a long time. It focuses on what can be done realistically and doesn't ignore problems associated with those actions. Solutions to the AGW problem should be based on maximizing effect of reducing/eliminating GHG emissions while minimizing problematic effects on people/society. In my province of Ontario, Canada, the biggest reduction in GHG emissions came from eliminating coal generation, and replacing it with natural gas. It would have been more expensive, but nuclear would have been an even better choice. It is my understanding that coal generation has dropped from about 50 % to about 30 % in the US over the last 20 years. A good first step would be eliminating coal generation altogether, and replacing it with natural gas, or even better, nuclear.

Did somebody say 'aether' ? ( gravitational, this time )

I' would agree. ( and disagree with Bufofrog ) In this scenario there is no force on the tote, as it is connected by a slack flex-hose, but the pump, which is accelerating the contents of the tote by exerting a force on the water in a specific direction, will feel an equal and opposite force in the other direction. Assuming the tote is open to atmosphere, only gravity and atm pressure are acting on the contents. Gravity can be disregarded, while atm pressure acts equally from all sides. If the pump was integral to the tote ( a solid connection ), the pump-tote system would experience a force in the opposite direction as the flow, but you specified a slack flex-hose.

But if you were going to do a field treatment of gravity, space-time geometry would be the field.

We could do with a little more civility around here. Both INow and Zap can call me names/insult me if they wish, and I won't take it personally; after a while you get to know people. New members however, haven't gotten to know our personalities yet, and can be put off by our behavior sometimes. I have come to recognize that you need to tread lightly in certain subjects like AGW, as some people will assume posts have ulterior motives/agendas; a new member, who is unsure about the science will ask a question and be accused of being a denier. Now, quite a few times this turns out to be true, but we've probably turned away quite a few new members who thought they could come to a science site and discuss anything science related, without being accused of having an agenda. I don't say "This is who we are; if you don't like it, there's the door.". Rather, I want to thank Wallflash for bringing it to our attention, and personally, I will endeavor to do better and be more civil. ( my avatar might look bad-ass, but I'm actually a very sweet guy )

and on re-reading my post and your reply, I realized I had Pythagoras backwards for positive and negative curvatures. Positive ( like a sphere ) should be MORE than 180 deg. Negative ( like a saddle ) should be LESS than 180 deg.

Energy providers don't choose the energy they provide. We, the consumers and industry, choose which energy we'll use, and the energy provider will provide it if they want to profit. BUT, we need to be given a choice first. Right now we don't have an alternative, especially if you don't live in a metropolitan area. I remember when gasoline was $0.69 per Imperial gallon ( I didn't drive yet in the late 60/early 70s, but I remember ). It is currently about $5 per imperial gallon, and people are still driving big trucks/SUVs if they can afford them. So who has changed their habits because of the added costs ? Certainly NOT rich/affluent people that don't need to. Yet people earning minimum wage, in smaller towns without good public transit are struggling to put food on the table, or gas up their car to get to work. Everything sounds simple and rosy if you ignore the downsides.

My ( limited ) understanding was that you could always tell using Pythagoras'... A triangle's vertices add to 180 deg in no curvature. To less than 180 deg in positive curvature. And to more than 180 in negative curvature. But that doesn't seem to apply to the FLAT Torus example I mentioned in a previous post. Maybe someone more familiar with diff geometry and topology can clarify.

Thanks for putting the 'meat on the bones' of our understanding, Mordred.

One thousand would be a single chip about the width of 20 human hairs. ( there are 5 in the 1/10 photo above ) An even bigger breakthrough would be a way to sequence the chips so as to have an array miles long. You could put the LHC out of business. ( kidding, the article doesn't mention power draw per 'cell' )

You want addresses for Rangerx and Raider5678 so you can go run them down ? I'm getting tired of the car/driving analogies myself. ( just joking, I don't have addresses...or do I ? )

That darn cat's wavefunction sure does get around, considering the cat is half dead...

I like ths... I would think that, since we are increasingly dependent on power, more nuclear ( and fusion research ) combined with solar panel 'farms to provide electric power for all applications ( improved battery tech ) would be a strong positive. Most of the programs pushed by Governments, such as cap and trade, or carbon tax, do little or nothing to reduce GHG emissions, as they just impose a 'cost' to continue doing business as always. Only those that can't afford it are forced to change their ways, so I see these initiatives as a strong negative.

Well it may help to consider that photons interact with the electrons in the medium they are traversing, and that leads to an 'effective' speed reduction. But actually, between each interaction, they still travel at c . Gravity is self-interacting, so one could assume massless gravitons travel at c also, except when they interact with themselves to reduce their effective speed. These would be the 'tails' Markus refers to

Yes, an unrolled cylinder is flat. As opposed to a hemisphere ( + curvature ), which lacks material near the edges to allow flattening ( the world map problem ) Or a saddle shape (- curvature ), which has too much material near the edges to allow flattening. And I remember reading the same in K Thorne's book, about the various ways to formulate GR. But I've never seriously considered space-time as something that can 'bend' or curve. However, manipulating the co-ordinates in that manner seems to fit extremely well with observation. ( by the way, what does "gasho" mean ? ) Wheuw ! I thought you were gonna say "There are many ways to skin a cat". Those are fighting words to us cat-owners .

You have never clarified the original question. You have allowed us to interpret the OP as we see it, and once we offer a solution to OUR interpretation, you tell us we are wrong ? How about reposting the original question, as YOU interpret it ( but in a clear manner, not like previously ), and then we can discuss it properly.

It's not a utopia; we have our problems. But we tend to work on the problems as one group. We don't have half the country pitted against the other, where certain unscrupulous people/political parties can leverage that polarization for their own gain. But Canada is a big country, and some regions undoubtedly get pitted against other ( see Quebec ). That being said, If I could no longer live in Canada, my second choice would be the US, and I imagine Rangerx feels the same. It is closest to 'our' way of life. Besides, I have faith in you guys, you've lost your way before, but always come back to the right path.

N Pelosi was had. M McConnel finally promised a hearing in the Senate that seemed reasonable, so she handed over the articles of Impeachment. At which point M McConnel reneged of the promise, and only wants to present arguments that the Impeachment process was a sham. IOW just repeating the process Congress just went through, and hoping ( guaranteeing actually ) a different outcome. Then they can claim D Trump was not Impeached, taking advantage of the fact that most of the American population doesn't realize that he IS Impeached already, and they can deny the whole thing at election time.

Read an interesting article today, that proposes Harry as the new Governor General of Canada. The current Governor General is Julie Payette, a Canadian ex-astronaut, who was apparently indicted in Maryland for assault and subsequently had the charges dropped and records expunged. Our PM called her the best of Canada when he nominated her. Apparently she doesn't like the position much, either. As the GG is supposed to be the Queen's representative in Canada, would Harry not make a much better choice since he'll be living in Canada ? He gets the GG security team, and he earns his keep. The only problem would again be the wife, as I don't think she'll put up with Ottawa weather ( preferring BC ), and she would balk at the ceremonial duties of the GG.