> tl;dr: Usually white.

Since the context of the question was cells rather than tissue, I'll note that "white" often arises from an agglomeration of many clear/transparent things: salt, sugar, milk, snow, etc. All the single eukaryotic cells I've examined via microscopy have been essentially transparent. (In fact, quite sophisticated methods are necessary to discern many features in the living, unstained cell.)

A while, but not forever. Even elastic deformation dissipates a little heat (termed internal friction or sometimes mechanical hysteresis).

> I wouldn't call this an analogy, it is actually the same thing.

Ah, good. It's outside my research field, so I hedged my language in case the correspondence wasn't exact.

An analogy I've found useful: where is a 1 Hz sinusoidal wave? Well, it's everywhere. Having a precise frequency goes hand in hand with extending from -∞ to ∞. It has no single location.

What's the frequency of a point? Well, it doesn't have one; there's no physical extent for us to examine its periodicity.

In between these two extremes, you could have a localized wave whose position can't be well defined because it's not pointlike. Its frequency also can't be well defined because it's not perfectly periodic. You could estimate these two values, but they'll always contain ambiguity; in fact, as one becomes more certain, the other becomes less certain. This has nothing to do with a measurement limitation. It's a fundamental constraint.

> Empirically, not draining melts faster.

For that container material and geometry and those environmental conditions, etc. Dropping these qualifies gives an unequivocal statement that's not convincing, considering the various factors discussed in this thread.

Over time T, the approximate distance L explored through diffusion (with diffusivity D) is related as T scaling with L^(2)/D.

Convection can be faster over longer distances, if convection is present.

> only it also works in glass and cells, which is a crystalline structure, and it also works in space, which is something idk.

This conflates multiple different phenomena. Without bringing in technical jargon, which tends to confuse the issue, what is the ultimate question you're trying to answer?

I don't really understand the way you're using standard terms. "Cavitation" typically refers to the formation and collapse of vapor bubbles in a liquid under low pressure. "Cavitated away and ruptured" doesn't seem to have any meaning for EM radiation. Please clarify your intended meaning.

At an interface, it’s very likely for just-detached molecules to be deflected right back to the surface by the surrounding atmosphere, where they reattach. This is less likely to happen if convection is carrying them away, so the evaporation rate increases with wind.

The scissors example is particularly interesting (relative to the thought experiment of pushing a long rod) because no part of the scissors can move faster than light, and the mechanical wave that causes the scissors to close can't move faster than light, but the point of first intersection or overlap between the two blades (i.e., the point where cutting starts with ordinary scissors) can move faster than light. There's no object corresponding to that point, just a geometrical abstraction.

> curvature of space is the result of distributions of mass

Spacetime, not space. You may wish to edit your question to emphasize that the context you're interested in is general relativity.

It's the spatial variation in the curvature. Not sure what type of answer you're looking for.

The composition remains approximately the same, as thermal diffusion is enough to ensure even mixing over the accessible atmosphere. There is some varying sedimentation that becomes a factor at vertical scales of many kilometers (although over that scale, one also needs to consider, e.g., gas reactions from cosmic rays). I go into the math here. The characteristic sedimentation height scales with kT/gM, with Boltzmann's constant k, temperature T, gravitational acceleration g, and molecular mass M.

> when a metal is heated, its density decreases while its stiffness increases

Metals generally don't get stiffer with increasing temperature.

A search for water viscosity temperature will immediately give you many versions of the same table/chart showing the relationship. From that, you can quickly estimate the percent change across that temperature range and decide if the hypothesis makes sense. (There are actually two types of viscosity, but that’s a nuance that can be ignored in this context.)

> As a former competitive swimmer the water temperature has a meaningful impact on buoyancy

This part strains credulity. How were you able to gauge a <0.5% difference in buoyancy?

Thank you for this reference. The introductory section clarifies: the exophere isn't a cloud or wisp or confine but the region where gas collisions essentially no longer occur—the lower limit of rarefication. Any molecule that happens to have—or ends up having—a speed greater than escape velocity leaves for the void in a ballistic trajectory.

I don't think many would consider this an atmosphere in colloquial terms, but it is undoubtedly associated with our atmosphere (although arguably beyond its meaningful edge), so I appreciate your point: Humans haven't traveled very far from Earth.

The purported threshold I'm questioning is the one where molecules are suddenly "gravitationally bound to the earth," as in the parent comment. I'm skeptical about that and would like to read a more complete description.

> no human has ever left earth's atmosphere.

This seems like an arbitrary definition of "atmosphere." Exactly where do you define the threshold? Can you provide a literature reference?

>Water is less dense as a solid so pressure causes it to melt, so I'm not thinking there could be a solid core by pressure.

Liquid water is less dense than ice-Ih (the familiar crystal structure) but not less dense than ice-VI, into which liquid water would transform at room temperature given enough pressure (and a large enough ball of water). It's an interesting exercise to estimate the required radius.