J.C.MacSwell

Personally I doubt it is possible although I know the theory says that it is. I will guess (someone more capable can do the math) theory says it should happen once every Billion to the billionth power Universe lifetimes if a billion humanoids constantly attempted it without stopping to eat. The successful humanoid should just barely beat out the winning chimp in the "Billion Chimps randomly hitting typewriter keys until one types the complete works of Shakespeare in order contest". I'm sure I have grossly (to the power of grossly) underestimated the time required though for either event.

Can this also be considered an endothermic/exothermic chemical reaction? Also, why does water have such a high specific heat?

There is no outward component to the velocity prior to release. This outward component will start at 0 and increase although this "pseudo acceleration" is not linear and this outward velocity will eventually approach the total velocity. The motion will be tangent (in a straight line) to the circle in any inertial frame, gravitational effects aside. How it appears to an observer at the origin of the inertial frame does not change this.

If it's frozen solid and 4 inches thick the odds are very close to 100% or 1 in 1.

Do this only between the poles or you end up with a "coriollis sunburn" from friction along the sides of the hole.

That's what you said last "Cycle"!

I think (?) if you used proximity alone then randomization of the parent will result from magnetization of the baby. Of course you can create parentless babies by producing magnetic fields and we seem to be discussing a mixture of the two processes. Of course this is not perpetual motion and I have no idea how YT got that idea. (just kidding YT )

Good question. My guess is that the answer is no for the reason you proposed but I think there may be a lot more to it. For instance has the CMBR been redshifted in a continuous or quantized way? Also for a photon at (say) 450 nm does an infinite number of inertial frames exist thate would equate that photon at every wavelength from (but not including) zero to infinite? Edit: Just a heritical thought to add to my CMBR question but you could possibly build a "tired light" conjecture based on a quantum decay process.

You are right that it's not a perpetual motion machine. Perpetual motion machines are not possible. We don't know how well a heat engine could work, but we do know that there is an upper limit on how efficient they can work depending on the temperatures involved and that the entropy of a closed system will only increase.

One "machian" question would be whether in this "Earth only Universe" would it be much, much easier to shake your fist.

If you mean they weren't decent enough to want to pay their taxes then I think you hit the nail (nice British forged variety, a privelege to use etc.) right on the head.

Thank you. I Googled "dark energy" and realize (I think) there is no standard answer to what I asked.

Is the expansion (Hubble Flow) in agreement with the conservation of energy? I'm not sure how the accounting for the energy balance would work with distant volumes of space approaching/surpassing lightspeed wrt each other. So is the expansion considered to be in agreement or is this question considered not relevant or just unknown? I realize energy is not invariant wrt frames of reference. Also how would entropy increase relate to the above?

There are many ways to do it. Conceptually it is no different from using any source of heat at any temperature. The key element is using a significantly colder heat sink. The colder the potentially more efficient. The problem, of course, is that the heat sink must be significantly colder than ambient, unlike for higher temperature heat sources.

Try it a little to the left.

I can do that. The only energy used is from water at room temperature. (other than a small start up energy) It can run your lightbulb for weeks.

Assuming you are a 48 lb. arthritic senior citizen!

Clapping your hands together about 3 inches above and behind usually gets them.

Thanks, great link. The "fun" thing about it is that even without FTL messaging it puts serious strain on any common sense definition of what "now" means any distance from the point you are at.

My assumptions were that A and B were at rest in one inertial frame one light minute apart. If I was B I would see I would see (calculate) the message as from the present without lag then see the light flash one minute later. If I then signal my "driver" (let's call him c) conventionally by radio outside my house who is driving a significant portion of lightspeed (say 86%) toward A. If c then signals driver "D" unconventionally/instantaneously (read not accepted physics but same as the A to B signal) driver D being at rest wrt C. If D, having received the signal happens to be just outside the house of A and signals him conventionally (conventionally saves them from arguing about instantaneity even over the short distance) while travelling past (again 86% Light speed ) A would receive the last signal almost 30 seconds before sending the first, assuming I haven't made any mistakes and my assumptions are correct (of course they aren't because instantaneous messaging and SR are not compatible) While A and B would agree their signal had "zero slope", and C and D would agree their signal had "zero slope", each pair would see the other pair's signal as having negative slope.