J.C.MacSwell

Right on time... I know McConnell had already congratulated Biden, but I doubt he would have made this speech yesterday https://abc7.com/mitch-mcconnell-speech-donald-trump-senate-joint-session-congress/9410912/ "Mitch McConnell breaks from Trump in blistering speech McConnell: 'If this election were overturned by mere allegations from the losing side, our democracy would enter a death spiral.'"

Just an opinion, but I think there will be less Republicans supporting and/or condoning Trumps "efforts" now that the polls have closed in Georgia.

What might be the alternative? You quoted and wrote both, and they're in the order you did so. Maybe you were simply being disingenuous and forgot what you had posted?

Just stating it for a little clarity. But apparently not enough for everyone. Then he should share it with the courts, because he’s lost or had dismissed all of the 60-odd legal challenges he and his team have made But I think he's got it now. Exactly

There he is, voting in honour of his recently deceased family members...and the Dems still complain about it.

But on topic "I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have. Because we won the state.” is asking to counter election fraud with election fraud if his challenges are only due to suspect illegal Democrat votes, and don't include at least a claim of 11780 or more GOP votes being illegally discounted. Even if he believes the "we won the state" part, I would think that would be illegal, but at the same time I wouldn't bet money that Trump would realize it.

As per CY's post above, the question is how accurate they are at predicting outcomes. They can get that wrong even when being generally or largely accurate. The fact remains that they tend to slightly underestimate GOP support, for some reason/s.

It's fairly trivial to find anecdotal examples, real examples, of election fraud in any sizable election. This would be for either side. The judges who, correctly, dismissed Trump's legal challenges would not have just taken that into consideration, they generally would have even pointed it out when providing their decision. Not that they shouldn't, or don't, follow up where the fraud occurs, and would go further if it had a reasonable chance of affecting the election. Trump can huff and puff, but your judiciary is more solid brick than straw or sticks. (If he has any real proof of substantial fraud he has a chance for same reason...but it's extremely unlikely he has) All that notwithstanding, there are serious concerns going forward with ensuring online voting remains secure. Anyone else suspect that part of the GOP support for Trump's challenges is simply to keep his support for the Georgia Senate election and that part may diminish slowly afterward regardless of outcome?

I'm sure he has some. Just no where near enough to change the outcome. Where there's smoke...there's not necessarily full blown forest fires...

It's a small percentage effect, so even if the tendency is a slight one this can play a part.

Without actually listening to the links I suspect you pretty much nailed it.

As I've suggested, it's not just people who lie. You have to include the one's who are simply unwilling to participate in the polls. They too skew the results. I don't know what explanation you have offered. Is there more than just this?: Why would you think that would lead to a consistent Democrat bias in polling results? (not to be interpreted as intentional bias)

One more day and Trump will no longer be a useful idiot of the GOP, as far as current elections go, when the balloting closes in Georgia. Current polling puts both Democrat candidates leading marginally. The results could reflect on the discussion, but I'm not sure in what way.

Mach 8 is going to be above the terminal velocity, so assuming it's no longer is powered, it will be slowing down regardless of angle of descent.

“We live in a country where people will lie to their accountant, they’ll lie to their doctor, they’ll lie to their priest,” says Cahaly. “And we’re supposed to believe they shed all of that when they get on the telephone with a stranger?” Clearly then, not the homogenous group you seem to be implying the Trump voters are. Though surely you would have known any "shy" Trump voters would be underrepresented in any photos of mobs yielding Trump signs. The polls vs actual results have some reason or reasons. That's my opinion (as well as others as per the link) The further point I was making in addition to SNostalgia's is that they, the "shy" Trump voting group, don't even have to lie...they'll skew the results simply by refusing to be polled due to their dislike of Trump (or simple embarrassment to admit they actually like him) Let me know what you think of the article, and whether you agree or not with the gist of it. It was written late October before the election.

Absolutely. That was what you seem to have suggested. Quoting this: You said this: I recognized your silly point and chose to go along with it. I apologize if you were actually serious. (I don't think you were but why believe I was?) Back to my (and Science Nostalgia's) point, which I didn't think would be controversial: (Didn't take much of a search) ‘People Are Going To Be Shocked’: Return of the ‘Shy’ Trump Voter? https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/10/29/2020-polls-trump-biden-prediction-accurate-2016-433619 “We live in a country where people will lie to their accountant, they’ll lie to their doctor, they’ll lie to their priest,” says Cahaly. “And we’re supposed to believe they shed all of that when they get on the telephone with a stranger?”

My bad. I forgot all 70+ million Trump voters all went out and rallied. Fortunately Biden could draw crowds as well:

I suspect many, even in an anonymous poll, would be unwilling to admit they could vote for Trump, even if it was due to disagreeing with the positions of his opponents. This might lead many to lie or be unwilling to participate in polling (and this unwillingness alone would skew the results, even if everyone being polled was honest) I can't see the equivalent effect for eventual Biden voters.

Or anywhere? 😄

They'd be there for a porpoise... Happy New Year everyone!

Even my bike...likes Ike!

+1 studiot and that's quite a first post Olorin. Welcome to the Forum. Standard theory has all EMR at a constant 'c' in every inertial frame, not at a range of velocities. Or am I misinterpreting?

Not a complete answer but my understanding: Pitch axis torque from propulsion vs drag, and stability from the centre of gravity being below the centre of lift for the slower aircraft as required more so at lower speed. You will generally find higher speed aircraft with wings more centred on the body than in the illustration where the body and structure allow it, but the low wing one illustrated would be lower drag at the same speed than the high wing one, which matters even more at it's design speed.

Technically of course no. One's force per area and the other force times distance.

There's certainly mass exchange and pressure effects, including those resulting in buoyancy. I'm sure a case can be made there is plenty of "pressure exchange" depending on how you choose to define it.