MigL

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.

You guys make it sound like you actually expected things to unfold differently... For Americans ( well, not Rangerx ), you are very naïve.

For intrinsic curvature that is correct. An example of intrinsic curvature would be the old Atari 'Asteroids' game. The left side of the screen is identified with the right hand side, and the top with the bottom, such that when your spaceship disappears from one side of the screen it reappears on the other. The screen would be an example of a 'flat' 2dimensional torus, as opposed to the surface of a 'regular' torus which looks like a doughnut, and requires a 3rd dimension to visualize. Extrinsic curvature actually requires an external 'embedding' dimension. IOW a 4th dimension to describe 3dimensional curvature. An example of extrinsic curvature is the rubber sheet analogy of GR, and it is precisely why it is problematic. The flat 2dimensional sheet actually bends into an external ( 3rd, embedding ) dimension, when a mass is placed on it. I don't really consider the space-time of GR to be 'bendable' ( whatever that means ). But GR allows me to assign a co-ordinate system to that space-time, and the altered spacing of the co-ordinate gridlines in the presence of mass-energy ( or energy-momentum ) is the equivalent of 4dimensional 'curvature'. These co-ordinate gridlines are essentially equipotential field lines of the gravity field.

Way to go Mordred. You just gave him a whole bunch of 'fancy' words, whose meaning Conjurer has no clue of. He will no doubt use them as word salad in his next crap post. The rest of us thank you for your always informative posts .

If I have misunderstood the problem, I apologize And maybe the OP can restate it in a clearer fashion. Any fluid-dynamic effect can be considered as a pressure difference effect or a conservation of momentum effect. Does a wing produce lift because of the reduced pressure above the wing as compared to the pressure below, or does it produce lift by accelerating the air mass downwards such that momentum conservation imparts an upward acceleration to the wing ? Same with the propeller example previously used. Does the propeller reduce pressure ahead of it or does it accelerate a mass of air rearwards ? Similarly, a rocket can be considered by either the pressure imbalance method, or, momentum conservation method. ( most physicist prefer the momentum method as it seems more 'formal' )

Maybe you should have waited till after the 'flash' was seen to post this. Until then, it's just wishful thinking on your part. ALL information is constrained to travel with an upper limit of c .

And you'd be wrong. AGAIN !

If you were asked to divide 20 by 5, would you say 4, or would you say "depends, 20 of what ?" as if it makes a difference. You might consider that 'completeness', the rest of us consider it the opposite of acute.

If the contents are moving in one direction, conservation of momentum demands the container move in the opposite direction.

You realize you are using the Bohr atomic model from 105 years ago ? Electron orbitals are not orbits where the radius of the orbit ensures a circumference which is a multiple of a wavelength. Electron orbitals are probability distributions, where the electron may even be found in the nucleus.

It is dependent on the difference in energy levels of the electron orbitals. Most of the time the frequency of the resultant photon isn't even in the very narrow EM band where we 'see' colour.

All depends on the data you need to process. Large scale video processing, where large amounts of simple operations require multiple simple processing units to run in parallel. In a case like that even an AMD Threadripper with 32 cores is underpowered, and paralleled 64/128/512/1024 NVidia graphics cards with thousands of simple processing elements will outperform it. That is how modern supercomputers are built. For gameplay, on the other hand,which requires complex operations, and parallel coding is difficult, a single or dual core, at 5 GHz is probably best. To access the internet, I would recommend as large a memory as possible, allowing multiple tabs to be opened, but even 10 year old technology, like a 1st/2nd generation i5 @ 2 GHz, is probably overkill

That's not how it works. Consider a carbon atom. It is arranged in a specific crystal pattern, and the electrons are in specific orbitals to account for the molecular structure of graphite. And its colour is black. Take those same atoms and associated electrons, and rearrange them so that the crystal structure is different. The electrons for the new molecule bond using different orbitals, but the exact same electrons. And the colour of diamonds is clear. That's the beauty of good science ( as opposed to WAGuesses ), it fits observational evidence.

I don't understand your question ( and examples ) either. Instead of pulling a vacuum on the exit from the container, let's simplify and pressurize the container. So, if you consider a pressurized balloon, air escaping from a hole will lead to an imbalance in the pressure through the axis passing through the center and you could say that this imbalance in pressure results in motion away from the hole's direction. That is the simplistic view of a rocket. Or you could say the momentum of the air escaping the hole has to be balanced by an equivalent momentum imparted to the balloon in the opposite direction.

That would be correct. Because of gravitational time dilation, the frequency of the EM wave we measure higher up in the gravitational well of the sun, as compared to the point of emission on the surface ( much deeper in the well ), is reduced, or red-shifted. Since wavelength and frequency ae inversely related, the wavelength is increased in relation. Another way to look at it is that the EM wave loses energy climbing out of the gravity well, and energy is directly related to frequency. IIRC a student of R Dicke, at Princeton, measured the gravitational red shift of the sun in the 60s. It is also measured for the Earth, and is the difference between the surface and an orbiting GPS satellite that gives the GR adjustment for GPS systems. Also see Pound-Rebka.

Colours ??? What exactly do you mean ? The 'colour' of the EMR when they drop to a lower energy level ? Any other 'colour' is purely imagined. And only by you.

I know some women ( powerlifter, used to work at the local GM plant ) who can kick all your asses... But seriously, physical strength is mostly a function of hormones, and genes only determine the achievable limit. Incidentally those same hormones will also affect a female's ambitiousness and temperament.

That is a perfectly valid Newtonian equation. Now substitute values in for the variables. For light, m=mo=0 IOW it has zero rest mass because it can never be at rest. So your perfectly valid equation, when mis-applied in the case of light or heat, gives you the non-sensical solution 0=0. Now you're doing Physics . ( being very sarcastic )

The light spreads out into the volume of the room, and become more diffuse. I could give you the mathematical relationship, but I'm getting the impression that would be useless.

Exactly ! NOt really. One is the physical act of separation. The other is a mathematical concept. Do you really not see the difference ?

Sorry, you may be right. I was referring to the link that John C posted comparing Meghan and Kate headlines. To tell you the truth, I like the concept of a 'just for show' Monarchy, the same as I like museums, or traditional customs, but I really don't follow them much at all

Notice how there is no explanation of the force or knife needed to separate the cake into 5 pieces .

Sure. ! cake / 5 persons = 1/5 cake/person Notice the units and consistent dimensional analysis.

Yes, without units attached to those numbers, that is an 'abstract' equation. That is the beauty of Mathematics. That abstract equation can be applied to all sorts of things ( units ), and give consistent results. Even things that cannot be separated.