StringJunky

It's only true what you say because you are making it that way; a self-fulfilling prophecy. You are master of your own destiny. Read well what Delta wrote.

LOL!

The presence, or lack thereof, of ego and narcissicism are not indicators of intelligence. Where'd you get that idea from?

A light-meter in spot mode? It will measure shades of darkness or luminance; depends which way you want look at the readings.

If you don't think a therapist can help then it's almost certain that we can't. We are not even amateurs at it. We are just a bunch of people that like science and some earn their living from it. You need specialist attention.

Yeah... I can't face it. Must remember to avoid that one in future.

To add: possibly, the beginning of a new epoch.

Yes, there are utter a-holes that pass through here and one gets a bit jaded and quick to judge sometimes.

We are ordinary people sharing information, not paid employees.

I felt you were insulting Strange.

You aren't taking in what he's saying and he is not speculating. People only have a finite amount of patience and Strange is very patient. If he's sighing it means your attitude is pissing him off because you are not listening. You are clearly not liking the answers he's giving you and yet you plead curiosity.

Think of an OS map as an analogy. Although the elevation contours on a map look instinctively like hills to us, they are really abstractions of the real thing. Are those lines real? They are not a direct impression of hills, like in a photograph, are they; it require some extra mental gymnastics and interpretation. Truth be told, we are heading down a rabbit-hole...fast.

The universe has a density that suggests it is flat, which means that it is likely to be infinite in extent. What is the probability of a starting universe expanding with infinite speed to create an infinite expanse in a finite amount of time?

He can have his cake and eat it. GR says nothing about what initiated the BB phase; it only models to that point.

We've been 'winging it' for most of this thread. If the mods think this thread is too weighty in speculations then I think it should be put in that forum.

You're the one using his senses, commonsense and anthropomorphic terms like 'gleaned', 'shared' and 'felt'; I'm not. I'm talking in abstractions.

I don't think you'll find many scientists that think it just 'popped' into existence. Consider this: if the whole universe turns out be infinite in extent then it couldn't have done that in a finite amount of time; it had to have always been around. "In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded" - Terry Pratchett. Faintly ridiculous, don't you think? Unless there's an extant creator.

I think so, because if we have to use instruments we are creating a 'map of the territory' and a map is not the the territory; to borrow an expression.

OK. No prob.

In what sense are you against it? You mean the fact that people know what you voted. If so, that wasn't my intention. I thought if I chose the other option, no one would see the data, only me. I didn't want it to be private to me. If the other option meant that only what you voted for was private I would have chosen that, but I don't know. They are ten year blocks for the oldies so it's harder to guess a person's actual age and, as such, privacy in that respect is still relatively good, in my opinion

I can't answer because I don't know.

Dimension - a measurable extent of a particular kind, such as length, breadth, depth, or height. (My bolding; it is only using volume as an example). It could also be force which has the dimensions of mass and acceleration.

Only one new word at a time, please, Mordred; don't make me consult a dictionary twice in a day.

Yes, reality, as we know it, is a macro phenomenon and radio waves are not a macro phonomenon; the ontology of them is a mathematical.one. Any thing fundamental, like photons, are made up of measurable parameters but what they are as an entity is subject to modelling, which can change with new information. What scientists know about fundamental phenomena is always an abstraction; they are outside of our physical sensibilities to detect without apparatus.