swansont

Where? No, that means you have fewer atoms for the same mass, which (all else being the same) means fewer chemical reactions

When your prediction fails it’s a clue that your idea is flawed. This is a rather spectacular failure, befitting the flaw

Dividing by zero is undefined, which is what happens when you try and use a crappy definition, which is what W/g is.

No, since mass=gravity/weight is nonsense, as I have explained in another thread. Nothing valid can be derived from it.

First of all, let me say this: post non-mainstream material (i.e. any pet theory) in speculations You need to clarify what you mean by gravity in this equation. Typically we use variables that are precisely defined. I can't really come up with a meaning that's correct. Weight is a force, meaning W = mg, where g is the gravitational acceleration. So m = W/g, but you have weight in the denominator. So you are claiming the gravity is weight * mass, or m^2*g, and I don't know what that means. And since that's nonsense, everything derived from it is nonsense.

I don't know how you would expect me to do that, when I have told you that it's not, and conditions under which it fails to hold.

c is invariant, which means it's the same in all inertial reference frames. If you are at a fixed location in a gravitational field, you are in an accelerated frame, not an inertial one. You will locally measure c to be the same, but that might not be the case if you measure it in reference to some other frame. The difference, though, might be negligible with regard to the precision of a measurement you are making.

Do you have evidence of this for the pipeline? Is that your excuse for not providing support for your claims? Because if you don't provide it, then one can think that your post was just silly spin.

Not being able to get spare parts, and not being able to pay for fuel, is going to put a huge crimp in whatever airline service is still happening. Not having parts to fix military vehicles, beyond what they have on the shelf, is going to further hamper the invasion. I imagine the US and other countries are doing a reassessment of supply-chain issues regarding their own military, and the impact on readiness for sustained deployments.

"No" is correct What you should look at is people whio are developmentally disabled and unable to understand these concepts still grow. Or people who are in a coma.

The Peter Piper Institute being a notable exception. On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Internet,_nobody_knows_you're_a_dog#/media/File:Internet_dog.jpg

You haven't given enough detail (no mention beyond "test this"), and one instance is anecdotal.

Even unprocessed uranium is much more expensive than lead ($30-40 per lb for uranium oxide vs $1 per lb for lead). Depleted uranium would cost even more.

I'd like to know how a US president vetoes projects occurring outside of its borders. Biden dropped support for the Israel pipeline, as there were concerns about environmental impact and economic feasibility, but that doesn't stop it from happening. The only Canadian pipeline that pops up in a search is Keystone, which was for tar sands oil, and it went south, not east. So it was in the US, which is why it was under US jurisdiction.

Evidence? Evidence?

It’s not, but Pauli prevents particles from being in the same state. Neutrons and protons obey it. What? It’s definitely present in atoms, which is kinda what defines the atomic length scale

! Moderator Note Post your own ideas in your threads, not someone else’s.

! Moderator Note “alternative” theories should be posted in speculations and include a model and/or evidence

strontium has been banned as a sockpuppet of Ragingmoron. This was not in evasion of a ban.

! Moderator Note Moved to trash, being as it's so far off the reservation as to be unrecoverable

Also burn is possibly a colloquialism for "use up" Use up the fuel, so they can abandon the vehicle without it being an obvious dereliction of duty

Why don't you tell us?

Surely you can provide citations for this. How, exactly, did Russia "set up Ukraine as a country"? I thought that Ukraine seceded from the Soviet Union, along with Russia and Belarus.

These seem to be happening quite a bit lately. As Inigo might say to those attaching that moniker, "I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means"

You're going to have to be more explicit here in step 2. Gold and silver differ by 32 protons (Z=47 vs 79). One electron isn't going to do this. If you remove it, you have a silver ion. If you force it to combine with a proton and turn it into a neutron (and emit a neutrino) you will have palladium.