Genady

But I did not ask about any point of view on evolution. I ask a question related to scientific method. Given a hypothesis, "animals have counter shading because it balances their light reflection and makes them less visible," what test or tests could support or refute this hypothesis?

It is not about discovery, but about possible states of a particle: If a particle state has a definite position, then its momentum is a superposition of different momentum states. If a particle state has a definite momentum, then its position is a superposition of different position states. If it is in superposition of both position states and momentum states, then these mixes have to have certain spreads. Both position and momentum are not simultaneously discoverable, because there does not exist such a state where they both are definite, i.e., not superpositions.

I understand this explanation. What I am asking is, how can we know that this is WHY they have it. Maybe there is another reason? Maybe there are several different reasons? We know why engineers use this counter shading; we can just ask them. But how do we know, why this feature evolved in animals? BTW, the textbook explanation for sharks, for example, is somewhat different from yours. They say, that when other fish look at the shark from below, the shark is less visible because they see shark's light belly on the light surface background. When they look at the shark from above, the shark is less visible because they see shark's dark top on the dark bottom background.

That is what I thought, too. But it turns out to be wrong: How does the missing Titan submersible work? Here's a look inside (usatoday.com)

The uncertainty principle does not just say, "You can't go there." The uncertainty principle is not a first principle, not a given, but rather a theorem, a mathematical consequence derived from QM concepts of states and operators.

The second link, I don't trust. It is too simplified, for kids. The first link, I didn't see there anything about "more than 50-60% of vertabrates species are .........Except primates & a lot of birds....they mainly can see colors......" In fact, many years ago I studied biology, and got Master Degree (M.Sc.) in biology. One of my favorite courses was Animal Behavior, which I passed with A+. I remember well from that course that most, almost all animals have color vision. Usually, it is different from us, but they do have it. Some see fewer colors than us, some see more colors than us, most see different color than us. Regarding the first question, how one can support your explanation of why some animals have white/light belly? You didn't give any answer to it.

Test this explanation of why they have white/light belly. "cancel their darkness because their in the shadow under the animals body" etc. BTW, fish do not have "their shadow under their body." I don't think it is so. Did you do that research? Do you have a reference to such a research?

1. How can one test this hypothesis? 2. Is it a fact? How many is "many"?

Not everyone. I don't. E.g., https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/126248-what-does-emergent-mean-in-a-physics-context-split-from-information-paradox/?do=findComment&comment=1195979

There was a bang, and it has been detected: Secret US Navy underwater microphones detected Titan sub implosion | The Independent

"Twice the area of Connecticut" referred to where the surface search was going on, with the ships and the aircraft. On the bottom, the only place to look first was near the target, i.e., near the wreck of Titanic. Perhaps, the Titan was already there when the event happened and that's why the debris didn't move away. Thus, my opinion was wrong as I assumed that in 1 h 45 min they wouldn't be that far down yet. Maybe the contact was lost before the catastrophic event, and since the contact loss was a usual occurrence on these dives, according to the reports, they continued descend as planned.

I understand that the Titanic wreck is spread over such a big area because of the variable currents. These same variable and unknown currents could take the submersible anywhere in such area. Why the waters around the Titanic are still treacherous - BBC Future, an interesting article about the conditions there.

I know (have looked up) (sq. km, you mean). So, as per US news, the area is almost twice that of Wales. I don't think they search either Wales or Connecticut area on the bottom.

US news say the search area is twice the area of Connecticut. That makes it 35 000 sq. km. I guess this area refers to the surface area, where they are looking with the ships and aircraft. How does one find a 7 m piece of plastic on the ocean bottom 4 km below?

But by observing only a small subset of all phenomena you can understand only a small part of the "operating mechanism."

The submersible is either on the surface or on the bottom. If it is on the bottom, it will perhaps never be found. The search efforts will quickly stop after the rescue will turn to recovery. (MHO.)

This is interesting question.

The OP did not say anything about object/image distance. Rather about mirror/reflection size.

This is what I've found so far on this question: (What are submersibles, how do they communicate? (rte.ie))

You do not read it right. And I am tired of trying to explain it. You should focus on the reasoning rather than on the words. It is a matter of energy conservation, not of interpretation of the words. Good luck!

Only a very small slice of reality is around us in daily life.

I understand that you in fact mean "arbitrary."

Potential? It is used in engineering all the time! What conditions?

Units need to be compatible. They don't need to be the same. Compatible does not mean equal.

How do you know that this mathematical equation does not represent physical properties?