J.C.MacSwell

1. No effect on the axis, but the further from the axis the more time slows down. 2. 3. 4. Hmmm...wonder if any of these resemble "quantum spin" in any way?

All other things being equal cold temperatures should speed the process up a slight but predictable amount, as per time dilation effects. (Two identical "twin" samples the warmer "twin" stays younger)

Don't feel bad. I'm heading back now to give your idea away to the person who will get the credit for it. Neither he nor I are original thinkers but we manage to pilfer lot's of ideas with our time machine (we stole the design for it also)

Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee!

That's the idea. No atmosphere would amount to 2.7 K more or less depending on the direction. I want to include the radiation component of the atmosphere (not any conduction / convection contribution) which should be greater than the contribution of the CMBR.

To get an intuitive sense of this, picture yourself as one of the asteroids, and your twin brother in the same orbit right beside you. If you reach over and grab him nothing much changes. You don't both go plummeting toward the sun.

Nova Scotia, Canada, sea level, temperature at ground level 0 degrees Celsius, typical temperature gradient/distribution above that, say 75% (average for a clear night?) relative humidity, typical relative humidity distribution above that. Midnight on a typical night in early March Anything else anyone could think of being typical values. Botswana or anywhere else in other conditions would make interesting comparisons.

The kettle resists less as YT said. This increases the flow of electricity.

By your new reference frame the distance would contract to zero and the time lapse would be zero...thus instantaneous.

Is their such a thing?

Exactly. Reflect, absorb and re-radiate. Even when it appears clear this effect is still there but to a much less extent. I'm basically looking for an equivalent temperature for a clear night at sea level. I know it would depend on the temperature and humidity which would vary all the way up through the atmosphere. My experience (guess) is that a clear night vs overcast is worth at least 4 degrees Celsius in terms of freezing water. Not saying that is right, but that would indicate that the clear sky must be equivalent of well below freezing temperature in terms of a radiation heat sink.

From the earth's surface, on a clear night, what is the equivalent temperature of the night's sky? I notice that (as I expected) water will freeze (shell) over in a bucket at +2 C when I am watering my rink at night. When it is overcast at night I wait until it is below freezing. I'm roughly at sea level. Obviously the water is evaporation cooling and radiating more than it is receiving radiation and conduction in order to do this. I know it is not as cold as 2.7 K because the clear atmosphere is "clear" in the visible range but not all of the rest. So what is the equivalent black body temperature of the open sky?

I voted 1. 1 out of 100 seems ridiculously high to me (what percentage of Earth's "Amoeba Time" have we been listening?) But I think there are a lot more "Amoeba Planets" than just 100.

10,000 seems very low to me. On the other hand 2.2% of them "listening" seems awfully high.

By convention there would be lift forces perpendicular to the flow and drag forces in the direction of the flow.

Magnetism would be an effect of special, would it not?

Maxwell's equations didn't exist, and Michelson and Morely's experiment hadn't been done, so there really was nothing to prompt his relativity theories.

Thanks

Is this right? I don't know the #'s but if TWP is out selling 5 other books by itself (correct me if I took that the wrong way), how could averaging it with two more put that groups average behind the average of the other 5? Edit: OK average ranking, that's somewhat twisted, sales of the group of 5 could skyrocket, but if one stops selling entirely it drags the whole group to oblivion

What kid of reaction would these produce at room temperature? Should they be stored in proximity?

Went with 800

The one with less mass will generally sink fastest. Assuming they have the same weight in air, the one with the greater mass must be significantly larger in volume, so that it would only weigh the same due to the greater buoyant force of the air. In water this effect would be much greater, so all other factors being equal the one with the greater mass, and lower density, would sink more slowly.

Yes, I realize that is one of the definitions of the word. It is unfortunately not the only one.

The problem is that atheism is defined as : 1.Only those who deny the existance of God AND 2. Those who deny the existance of God and those that simply withhold judgement on the truth or falsity of the God hypothesis Since the above two definitions are not compatible, atheism, like many words, has no clear meaning, but must be taken in the context intended, which is often not clear.

Can you explain this? How is this arbitrary?