Strange

Certainly, if you need to separate them by mass. I suspect the OP just wants to separate them by charge. In which case you could used charged electrodes or, as they are moving, a magnetic field.

And yet you seem to have created a new account. Presumably you couldn't remember that you already had one ...

Meanwhile, your language is becoming increasingly incoherent. (And it started from a pretty low level.)

So when faced with science, you agree that your previous assertions were wrong. Well done. You have managed to combine two fallacies (the Galileo Gambit and Argument from Authority) in one sentence. Well done.

So you are convinced there is a link. Except you are not. Very "logical"

Can you show us the mathematics behind this? How well do the predictions of that model match the evidence?

Really?

The hallucinations start a bit earlier, in my experience!

It did seem unreasonable. I guess that is why it is affordable.

Having worked a number of "all-nighters" (24 hours or more) I can assure you this is not true. Also, I don't believe you can determine, by yourself, that you are not sleeping. You may think you have just blinked, but 10 minutes have passed. You will sleep while standing up. You will fall asleep in the middle of doing something and not really notice.

No. The acceleration appears to be driven by some sort of energy. The expansion happens naturally in the absence of any force. It doesn't. To be more specific, velocities don't add linearly and so the speeds of each rocket will not increase at the same rate. A---B---C---D---E---F--- v = 0 0.6 0.88 0.97 0.99 ...

That is generally known and taken into account.

I don't think there is a significant amount of H2O that close to any satellite.

But the signals are tiny compared to, say, sunlight.

The thing is, they don't grow crops. But farmers do, who buy GMO seeds and then need to buy pesticides. From Monsanto.

Apparently not. As always, you don't. You have that exactly backwards, as so often. The mathematics makes a clear distinction between local phenomena that can be simply described by special relativity, and more complex phenomena that require general relativity to describe them. To try and help you understand this, we have characterised the former as "relative motion" and the latter as "recessional speed". As expected, you have got a firm grasp of the wrong end of the stick. Because, counter to intuition, the normal state is that things experiencing no force will tend to move apart. That is just the way space-time works. It requires a force, and potentially an expenditure of energy, to stop that expansion. (p.s. metric expansion)

You use the word "logic" but clearly you have no idea what it means, if you can use it in a total non sequitur like this.

I don't know if all of them are unanswered or not. I certainly don't know if there are plausible (or even implausible) hypotheses for some of them. But that is irrelevant. You can highlight some questions that don't currently have answers. But that does not mean that there are no answers to any questions. Nor does it mean that it is impossible. No we don't. And if it is impossible, how come they exist? Well, a few seconds found these: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/336/6080/452 https://arxiv.org/abs/1305.5581v1 http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00114-009-0602-1 http://www.nature.com/nchem/journal/v7/n4/full/nchem.2202.html http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/358/1429/59 I'm sure there are thousands more. I assume you have read all of them? And can explain the flaws in every single one? Again, what is the point of this thread apart from you repeatedly saying "there are unanswered questions" (Duh, really?) and "I think it is impossible" ? And if it is impossible, how did it happen?

Because you are asking questions that there is not yet an answer for. There are hypotheses for several of those. And so ... ?

Octopus is derived from Greek and the correct English plural (it is an English word, after all) is octopuses. (The Greek plural is chtapodia.) As to original question, I think I say fun-guy in England but probably say foon-jee when living in Italy (even if speaking English!)

Shakes head in despair and walks away. You can move those goalposts all by yourself from now on.

You were talking about pulses, not a constant level. Of course pulses can have a frequency.

So, no evidence for the historical existence of Jesus, then.

All the many different experiments, done by people using different methods and different instruments, all just happen to have undetected errors that exactly replicate the predictions of theory? It seems easier to just say the evidence is consistent with the theory.

Momentum is only the product of mass and velocity for particles with mass. It is just an intrinsic property of photons.