Genady

I've watched it. IMHO, skip.

Humanity is too small - 14 orders of magnitude smaller than Avogadro's number - for overall patterns to emerge.

Molecules will keep bouncing and interacting as long as their environment allows.

This was not only about scientists.

Another exception here.

I liked most of Sherlock Holmes stories but was particularly impressed by the very first I've read, The Speckled Band. It happened completely by accident while I was waiting for my parents in some house with book cabinets along the walls. I picked a book, opened it randomly, started reading, and couldn't stop.

For me, Bradbury as weel, also Simak. There are couple others in sci-fi that stayed with me, but you perhaps never heard their names, e.g., Strugatsky Brothers. One of the popular Russian sci-fi writers, G. Altov, and his wife were family friends with my parents. However, in spite of his efforts to make me interested in sci-fi, I was only lukewarm to it. How about Conan Doyle?

Back to the OP question. I think that Jack London's stories are in that category.

OK. I got the answer to my question. This is good enough.

That is the only event horizon that is well defined. I assume that you mean some metaphorical event horizon. Then, only you know what it is.

If you are talking about GR, no problem.

Yes.

I am asking about the revolution that you referred to here: Do you mean that this^^^ revolution is happening now?

OK.

But which one? When did it happen?

Where did you learn that?

Which revolution was it?

Capitalism in the Marx's theory is a system of two classes. One owns the means of production, the other sells their labor.

I've learned an important system for "thinking backwards" from my high school math teacher. It included rules such as "don't use notebooks, use only separate sheets of paper", "write only on one side of the sheets", "have a large desk, so you can spread the sheets in one layer, having all the work visible", "don't use pencils, only pens; never erase what you write", ... The point of all this was that while solving a problem you keep your trials, errors, dead ends, intermediate results, etc. easily accessible and reusable. When you finally solve the problem, you "reconstruct" a logical way through this mess.

I wouldn't say that I fully understand what you mean, but I'm quite sure it is not in accord with the Marx's theory. A connection to the Marx's theory was the only reason I've asked.

I've asked this question because of your mention of "Marx's capitalist end game vision" and because this is what Marx's theory is about.

In what way is this story better than any number of others?

Does the wealth gap between classes widen? What is the critical mass? How far is there to keep approaching it?

Watching them is a nonstop fun. On one hand, we are not so different in the sense that we are also affected by the same factors. On the other hand, we are very different because we are affected by so many other factors.

Yes, when they are not starved, food related behavior can be very 'ritualistic'. Here is another situation. After the old dog died, we got a young male from Animal Shelter. At the first dinner time, he tried to jump at the dish as soon as it had food in it. But I held him until Amy, the now older female started eating. That was the only hint he needed. Never again he started eating before Amy.