swansont

Except that in hydraulics you exert a force via a source of external pressure which is lacking here, so it's really not.

If you had a rock on top of a fluid and there was no place for the fluid to go, then the rock would not sink. But that does not "lift" the rock. But you already said (I only quoted part of your post) you have a gap, so no, this does not work. But, again, your scenario (and the one in the OP) is not a tight-fitting container.

That violates Archimedes principle: an object will displace its own weight of the fluid. If it is less dense it will float, BUT there needs to be enough of the fluid present for this to happen. Otherwise it will bottom out. So 500 kg of mercury (a little less than 100L) will not float anything over 500 kg. exchemist notes this above.

That sounds like word salad. Explain what "limit momentum" is and show me where you used that phrase in this thread. Just posting this is insufficient. You need to make the connection between what you post and what you are responding to. You are rapidly using up any goodwill that this is a good faith discussion, and that this isn't just spamming nonsense.

“what causes the "Curved Fabric of Space" return to its previous state, into its unbent position?” is pretty clearly a question, albeit based on a physically unrealistic scenario

They had already appeared before the committee. It’s doubtful they would have let her testify if it wasn’t corroborated. The republican responses have not been under oath, and sometimes, like this, unattributed. Take them with a huge grain of salt. Pay attention only if they, too, testify under penalty of perjury

! Moderator Note If you were Spike Milligan offering his insight, it might mean something. ! Moderator Note Yes, exactly. It’s off-topic in a thread about depression, because as you have just admitted, it’s not about depression.

! Moderator Note Can we get back to the topic of the OP? Telling someone to smile, or to relax, is not dealing with depression

I just did a search, and “neutral” only appeared in this post. So how could you have explained it before?

They are indeed equivalent mathematically, which is why you can't say one has to be taken as true and the others as false. Meaning that the view that the cat is in a superposition of states and the wave function collapses is a valid way of looking at the problem. So that leads me to think that your view is not actually what the many-worlds interpretation actually says.

Do you have a credible source for this?

Many worlds is an interpretation of QM rather than being QM theory, but if you think the cat is in one state but we just don't know about it, that sounds like a hidden variable theory, and that runs afoul of Bell inequality experiments.

No. The neutrinos are oscillating between mass eigenstates, but if there were internal structure there would have to be component particles. There's no evidence of this.

What? Information is negative, somehow?

No. Fundamental/elementary massive particles show no evidence of having any internal structure. Electron, muon, tau, and the associated neutrinos, all the quarks.

At one time, yes. But then it was discovered that neutrinos oscillate between the different “flavors” which requires they have mass. The upper limit (measured in energy) is less than 1 eV

Smallest object with mass or object with the smallest mass? Elementary particles are pointlike. Smallest nonzero mass? Probably the neutrino, when considering all flavors with the oscillations.

! Moderator Note As opposed to other times, where nobody encouraged people to conform? You need to re-form this so that 1. it's not an exercise in begging the question (i.e. establish that you have a valid premise) and 2. It's posted in the proper area of the forums. This is not a discussion for The Lounge.

! Moderator Note The discussion should take place here.

! Moderator Note Our rules on advertising discourage advertising one's own site, and encourage discussion taking place here. IOW, "details here" isn't good enough; you need to have included some discussion here, and have the link be in support of that post From 2.7 We don't mind if you put a link to your noncommercial site (e.g. a blog) in your signature and/or profile, but don't go around making threads to advertise it. Links, pictures and videos in posts should be relevant to the discussion, and members should be able to participate in the discussion without clicking any links or watching any videos.

! Moderator Note Our rules require that discussion take place here. Since the OP has declared this to not be the case, this is locked. Not at all, IMO.

Neither of these address my comment. Just another distraction.

You do realize this is a prediction, and not a report of events? (bold by me) "We expect violence could occur for weeks following the release, particularly as DVEs may be mobilized to respond to changes in state laws and ballot measures on abortion stemming from the decision," the bulletin, dated June 24, said The reports I have seen is violence perpetrated by the forced-birth people - a vehicle driven into protesters and a politician striking their opponent https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10951557/Truck-plows-crowd-pro-choice-protesters-Iowa-leaving-one-injured.html https://people.com/politics/rhode-island-cop-drops-out-senate-race-after-opponent-attacked-abortion-rally/

That was a question meant to elicit a link, not just a comment.

Where are you “hearing” this, and what would be the nature of their entanglement?