Endy0816

Here's a good demonstration of a fire piston. A very cool bit of ancient technology.

It'd almost be worth bringing it back for the entertainment factor. "I know you just lost to that guy, but guess who your new boss is?" Always wonder what the Founding Fathers' thought process was on that one.

Very true. This does make you think. We have the Antarctic as an example where we have exercised restraint, but whether this will remain so is of course unknown. Yeah, main thing is that they simply wouldn't be accustomed to the rigors involved or would consider the risks to be extreme compared with their controlled environments. Reasonable to assume by then that they could build habitats to suit any particular preference both in space and on lifeless bodies. Possible though that some might not find that as enough of a challenge.

I earnestly hope not. I've had dreams that would be bad for our whole species. Practically speaking you never actually gain any outside knowledge as you dream beyond what your standard senses provide. If it is something possible/probable you might however imagine it occurring only to see it actually happen later. Should note that false memories can also play a role here.

The ones around our own Gas Giants do tend to have some decent resources or novelties so similar exomoons would definitely be of interest. Realistically travelers would have to be living in space already to reach that far. One that shared a similar atmospheric composition might even be forbidden from inhabitation as that could harm future research into native life.

Wouldn't the radius shrink and mass increase proportionally?

Yeah, might have been the IAEA. Considered a generally authorized destination for distributions(assuming I've parsed the legalese correctly). https://rsicc.ornl.gov/default.aspx https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/10/appendix-A_to_part_810

-snip

No. We know something has to occur due to the finite speed of light when density crosses the critical threshold. Other thing is nothing else can match a BH for compactness. Accretion disk of an equally massive star still can't orbit as closely. Whatever goes in is lost. Outside we never learn what has happened, if anything, past the Event horizon.

The last is potentially inaccurate. Only fairly large ones take long periods of time.

I think average KE would stay the same as they only have each other to run into. For the center of black holes the formulas fail to give meaningful values. Trying to find density, results in a division by zero situation, a mathematical singularity.

Yeah, often incorrectly thought of as the be all end all, when in some cases you can have even smaller measurements.

Ironic

Does the math say anything about causality issues if your travel was to somewhere in the Unobservable Universe?

Buoyancy would be correct to use for both. Air and water are both formally considered fluids. Buoyancy is ultimately due to Earth's gravity pulling on whatever fluid you are displacing. A simpler way to say it is: FB = mfl * g or Buoyant Force = Weight of the displaced Fluid A wet-suit could help you to displace more fluid and increase your buoyancy that way. Net force would be the Buoyant force minus the object's own weight. Hopefully this helps, interesting question.

One theory I've read is that it allows us to pick up on and mimic the various bird and animal calls. This would have given our ancestors a sizable advantage both in their own hunting and knowing when a predator was about.

For the second did you try multiplying by 1 = (c+v)/(c+v) and 1 = (c-v)/(c-v) respectively to simplify(Difference of two squares)? Keep in mind: 1 - (v2/c2) = (c2 - v2)/ c2

Sorry, your image didn't upload correctly. Might try uploading on imgur if the forums are causing the issue.

Claude Shannon(1916-2001) Father of Information Theory, once teatime companion of Alan Turing

At one point he worked in/with Bell Labs even. I would still say that others were more instrumental in developing the internet itself.

Pressure is force exerted over some area. Fewer or simply less energetic(lower temperature) atoms bouncing around and you get a lower pressure. Closer you get to zero and the more difficult achieving an accurate reading becomes. There's vacuum energy too ,which I think would prevent you from getting all the way to zero in any case. Can you upload a picture of the gage? You have probably drawn a decent enough vacuum for most things though never hurts to check.

Definitely. I'm mainly intrigued by their application to air purification in space. Huge game changer from needing to use amines, which both add complexity and leave the air smelling of ammonia.

You can express most things as an equivalent scenario, if that is what you are looking for. For S = V.t: If we measure Bill as traveling 50 meters every 10 seconds, how far would he go if he traveled for 60 seconds? Distance = (50 meters / 10 seconds) * 60 seconds I normally visualize the product as an intersection of two lines crossing. Something like the figure below. Line A might be our velocity and Line B might be the time for example. Where they cross is your product.

Is that for isothermal expansion of an ideal gas? Some of the setup looks different, negative sign and use of tau symbol. Could of course simply be rearranged though.

I'd guess relates to the text informing guests of cookies, but not sure. Might be in the page source.