michel123456

Right. But if you describe fusion or fission time-reversed things will not look that much awkward as an omelette getting back to an egg.

Right, water does not flaw uphill. But water from the rivers flow to the ocean, then evaporates and eventually rains on a mountain top, forming a river, ever again.

That happens also in all my work reports. Chapter 1.1 is the beginning. I have no report beginning with 2.3 (for example).

I have repeatedly thoughts about this. All the examples we use are direct products of Life (an egg) or by-products (a broken glass). But when you take examples from simple physics, you see water getting into vapor & vapor getting back into droplets. So I am still wondering about the validity of the argument.

Hexagonal pattern works well for surfaces (2D). However in 3D I wonder what kind of "hexagonal pattern" it really is. The "chicken wire" pattern shown in Wiki is a mix of hexagons & pentagons.

It looks pretty much like the principle of "Libre Examen" (Free examination) but I can't find anything related in English. Google translated : From https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libre_examen

If you like discovering covers, the most famous is Sinatra's My way. Here the original by Claude François.

Disgression about the reputation points. FYI as an external observer and simple user I noticed that the OP has minus 80 points. That is not good because it shows incivility or worse. Then you jumped in, with neg points also (for some to me unknown reason). After following your posts I came to the conclusion that you are simply unfamiliar with the Forum. For that reason I gave you some rep points so that you appear as neutral.IMHO there is good stuff in your posts. Interesting at least.

The best song ever. If you go away is from Jacques Brel too. So here the "Grand Jacques"

Does that mean that essentially Gravity & time are the same thing? And Shouldn't there be a negative sign and become (1,1,1,-1) ?

From current theory, the "date of birth" of the universe is an absolute. It happened at a specific time stamp.

I strongly believe there is a misinterpretation of data. You cannot use a theory based on relativity and end up with an absolute result. You must end up with a relative result. That is to say that any observer anywhere & anytime in the Universe will observe a Universe 14 billion years old.

Physical reason? Or reason? There are 2 ways to see things: 1. the Universe comes up, it is young, it gets old and older, then it dies. It is a Universe that looks like a living being. As it gets older, it changes and then yes, an observer in an older Universe will observe something different that what we do observe today. Which means that today in some sense we have the privilege to observe the "true universe" in contrast to future astronomers that will observe only a single galaxy. 2. All observers from any point of it are observing grosso-modo the same thing. From any point in space & from any point in time. That is the Copernican principle. I support point 2.

The paper flies over my head. And you believe that? That an astronomer is observing the unique Milky way galaxy as the unique galaxy in the Universe? Simply because he happened to be borned several billion years from now?

This link supports the concept of the Observable Universe getting more & more empty as time passes by. It gives the result of future generations (in billion years from now) observing a Universe made up of our single Milky Way galaxy, which is totally bogus to me. I hope I am not the only one with this opinion.

At what point exactly?

A two-dimensional pancake? That was not my understanding. I thought it was more a point-like situation.

And this French show (called Taratata) that requires live performance without any soundtrack, playbacks, orchestra or any other support. Lady Gaga: Poker Face et "mon français est merdique (my french is shitty).

from graviton's wiki: Wich means it is the other way round. It is not because they are massless they propagate at c. It is because they propagate at c that they must be massless. I ment that Relativity is not a force of nature. Relativity cannot cause anything. It is a Theory, an explanation.

It cannot be a consequence of Relativity. Relativity is an explanation, it is not a cause.

Probably. All information need to be checked twice. It is really a HUGE topic. Plastic industries & industries related to plastics are colossal. Billions of dollars, million people, almost all kind of products are involved. So far I have seen that WWF focuses on single use plastics that float. The plastics that sink to the bottom are not priorities because the (white supremacist) tourist does not see it on his (private) beach. The commonly agreed solution to plastic waste is circular economy. Re-use, recycle. Ban is not an option, except maybe for straws & plastic bags that are produced by small factories of 3 or 5 workers in all kind of countries (China, Pakistan & India included). If they go bankrupt (the factories), nobody will care.

Yes. Fishing Nets Account for 46 Percent of All Ocean Plastic. From my knowledge: 1. Plastic pollution of the seas come principally from those 10 rivers. None is in Europe or the U.S. 2. Plastic is recyclable. In theory, it is a fantastic product, you can use it again & again & again. Throwing it away is pure madness: it is throwing money away. 3. The main problem is about single use plastics. At this moment if you want to erase totally plastic from our civilisation you must erase almost everything (cars, mobile phones, computers, tv's, clothes, shoes, building insulations, table tops, a.s.o.). 4. Replacement products for plastics are the ones we used in the 19th century: wood, leather, stone, ceramics, fur, etc. I expect you don't want a world like that back.

Exactly. When the Phoenicians mariners sent by Pharaoh Necho II (circa 600 BC) returned from their journey around Africa, they told that at some time the sun was at noon in the northern part of the sky. They were considered as liars at the epoch but now it is a very strong argument to believe them. They indeed traveled in the southern hemisphere.

And also the way the ancients use to get proper orientation: you point a stick toward the sunrise at horizon in the morning, and in the evening you point a second stick towards the sunset. The bisector gives you the South. (and not the North).