MigL

Space-time is geometry. We know that at sufficiently small scales ( Planck ), geometry ceases to have meaning. Until we can be sure of the 'size' of the seed from which our universe sprang, we can't be sure if space-time is a meaningful concept that can be applied ( in that primordial era ).

Sorry, I keep mis-typing the number... The relic radiation of the CMB is from approx. 300 thou yrs after the BB event. ( could not edit previous post )

The Big Bang didn't originate at a 'center' or any specific location. It originated EVERYWHERE. ( once you come to grips with this, you understand more cosmology than 99 % of the population ) Further, properties like momentum, energy, velocity, etc. are all frame dependant; and anytime you specify one of these quantities, you need to specify "relative to what". ( that's where the term Relativity comes from ) As you seem to have difficulty with the definition of a FoR, I suggest a google search for some clarification. That being said, the closest thing to a 'universal' reference frame ( I stress, no such thing exists ), is the CMB. This is the left-over glow from when matter in the universe consisted of opaque, decoupled plasma, approximately 300 mil yrs after the Big Bang event. I cannot say the 'observable' universe, as that has changed over the past 13.4 bil yrs. Our galaxy's direction of motion, and speed, relative to this 2.7 deg 'glow', can be calculated from the amount of 'blue' shift ( of the CMB glow ) in the direction of travel. But you must understand that this is NOT a real 'universal' frame. ( that is impossible for mathematical reasons )

You guys are not talking about the same thing. Sure, a universal health care system is something to strive for; most other countries ( Canada and Europeans ) already have some form of it. It has a few problems but none of us would trade it away. Free education is also something to strive for, as it is an investment in the future. I'm not sure about European countries, but Canada already subsidizes a large part of post secondary education. It might not happen in my lifetime but I can see the day that we'll have free education in Canada. Other suggested left policy is also desirable. Things like UBI and real pensions, reparations for groups that have been, and still are, disadvantaged in the past, so that everyone has equal opportunity ( NOT equal outcome, that is a personal responsibility ). And a lot of these things could be election platforms in places like Canada or Europe, and I wouldn't be a bit surprised if we voted to at least attempt them. But this is a US election we are talking about. You remember the push-back B Obama got with his health care proposal ? And not just from the Republican party, but from regular citizens ( even some who leaned Democrat ). It was push-back from American people and disenfranchisement with a government which didn't listen to them, that got an idiot like D Trump elected President. Some in the Democratic party ( and some members of this forum ) think that its a good idea to push even harder for policies like health care, free education, UBI and reparations. I foresee increased push-back from the American people and anger at an aloof government who isn't addressing their ( perceived ) needs. ...and another 4 years of D Trump. Myself, I would be happy with a presidential candidate who has some experience with foreign policy and trade, and who will restore the reputation of the US around the world. One who promised to modify or replace the current mess of a health care system with a truly universal one. One who, in his next term, or a few years down the road, might even start looking at subsidized education. But most importantly, one who isn't DONALD TRUMP. ( don't hand him the election by going too left, too quickly )

How long do you think the pension system would last ?

There's crazy, and then there's CRAZY, Dimreepr.

What are your options ? Destroy the institution of US Presidency because this one happens to be a jerk ? There have been plenty of jerks in recent history who led countries we went to war against ( A Hitler and B Mussolini ), while others were tolerated ( J Stalin, V Putin, and most of the Russian leaders from the 50s to the 80s, Mao Zedong and subsequent Chinese leaders, including present day Hong Kong, the North Korean Kim dynasty, Canbodia's Pol Pot, Turkey's Recep Erdogan, and quite a few South/Central American dictators ). If you don't tolerate these leaders, what do you suggest doing about it ?

I believe people are allowed to believe whatever they want, even if discriminatory. Acting on those beliefs is different, and against the law. Inciting violence against others certainly is. There are as many opinions as there are people on this world. If everyone was offended by everyone else's opinions, there wouldn't be much discussion. Then how would I pass the time at work ?

Don't feel bad. I still do.

"Boris, recognized by a trademark mop of unruly blonde hair and a bumbling, gaffe-prone speaking style" Don't know much about the man ( other than he wants England out of the EU although being the son of an EU civil servant ), but the above quote makes him sound like your version of D Trump. Join the club.

Violence is a totally different subject, and no-one should be expected to tolerate it. But if we are talking ideas and views people may have, I would tolerate anyone's OPINION, but will certainly not tolerate wrong FACTS. ( though sometimes, people's ideas/views can be considered emotional violence )

Really ? My favorite was Melanie Chisholm ( sporty ), the others all seem 'flaky'. She also seems intelligent enough to have attended school, and not relied on looks/sex to gain fame. I just thought I'd discuss something important, as all the 'bashing' from one side, and the feigned outrage from the other ( while providing no discussable evidence ), is getting old.

You should be able to get good results by fashioning a beanie cap out of tin foil or aluminum foil. For best results, don't forget to add a propeller on top.

Sorry, I have not visited this topic for a while. Been busy Googling "Japanese Nurses'.

Pressure, as commonly understood, is not easily related to General Relativity. However, if we think of space-time as a coiled spring, it is easy to understand that if you compress that spring, you increase its energy, and the curvature of space-time around it. An easy to understand excerpt from https://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/Guth/Guth3.html explains the relationship between pressure, energy density, space-time curvature ( gravity ) and expansion/inflation. "THE PRESSURE OF THE FALSE VACUUM can be determined by a simple energy-conservation argument. Imagine a chamber filled with false vacuum, as shown in the diagram below. For simplicity, assume that the chamber is small enough so that gravitational effects can be ignored. Since the energy density of the false vacuum is fixed at some value uf, the energy inside the chamber is U=ufV, where V is the volume. Now suppose the piston is quickly pulled outward, increasing the volume by dV. If any familiar substance were inside the chamber, the energy density would decrease. The false vacuum, however, cannot rapidly lower its energy density, so the energy density remains constant and the total energy increases. Since energy is conserved, the extra energy must be supplied by the agent that pulled on the piston. A force is required, therefore, to pull the piston outward, implying that the false vacuum creates a suction, or negative pressure p. Since the change in energy is dU = ufdV, which must equal the work done, dW = -pdV, the pressure of the false vacuum is given by p = -uf. The pressure is negative, and extremely large. General relativity predicts that the gravitational field which slows the expansion of the universe is proportional to uf + 3p, so the negative pressure of the false vacuum overcomes the positive energy density to produce a net repulsive gravitational field. "

Assuming there is an absolute reality, independent of observers and with unchanging rules nd laws of operation ( and this may be what AUDI R6 calls science ), all we have ever been able to do is 'poke it with a stick' and make SUBJECTIVE observations of this absolute reality. Since our observations ae both subjective and limited ,any model we build will be incomplete or use differing paradigms. As examples, Newtonian gravity/dynamics is incomplete as it doesn't apply to high energy/high speed situations, while GR and QFT are incompatible because they use differing paradigms. As the only truly accurate and encompassing model of the universe would need to be the universe itself, we build our incomplete models so that we don't introduce any further ambiguities. And since words can have different meanings to different people, we use math, which has clearly defined and universally understood meanings. Mathematics has these properties because it is self-consistent; if you want to call that 'provable' that is your option. If you want to make the claim that either ( your definition of ) science, and/or ( your definition of ) math, are true/wrong/proven/etc. you should recognize that is subjective, and, at least on this site, you are the only one who thinks so.

Thanks for putting it all in perspective, Koti. I guess you would know how to deal with children.

My post was in reply to Swansont who claimed that just the 'state' was teleported, not the particle. The 'state' is information, and as such, cannot be teleported. ( at least according to my understanding of what 'teleportation' means; or am I being pedantic ? )

"The information transfer happens no faster than c" Exactly ! so why call it 'teleportation', which implies instantaneous transfer across undefined distance ?

And you're still playing the victim... I've already explained that I thought your first line was a set of laws that you proposed; and I apologized for my misunderstanding. Your UBI is a policy that gets voted into place. In my mind; a law has consequence for non-abidance; otherwise, it's a suggestion. As to why you would take my joke about you being a D Trump advisor so badly, I really didn't think that would be an issue, given your well-known feelings for the man. The fact that you pretend to be 'hurt' by my joking, reminds me of the time you called me a 'TRUMPet' ( even though you know how I feel about the man ). I don't recall going 'crying to mommy' after that incident. Then again, I've never subscribed to 'victimhood". And by all means, Swansont, go ahead and split off this 'hijack', even though I'm just responding to other's 'hijacks'.

Is that even an accurate statement ? the 'state' of a particle is information; as such it cannot be 'teleported', but must obey locality.

You are conflating 'matter' with 'real', and 'anti-matter' with, what, 'unreal' ? Anti-matter particles, like a positron for example, is just as 'real' as an electron. There is no guarantee that only matter escapes the event horizon and becomes real; Anti-matter has the same probability of escape and becoming real. You haven't presented a solution, just a lack of understanding.

Had to double check; I did read the OP right. Apparently some think we are discussing POLICIES, not LAWS. The OP clearly states LAW. And the definition of LAW is... ''the system of rules which a particular country or community recognizes as regulating the actions of its members and which it may enforce by the imposition of penalties' So, I'm obviously in the right thread. Those who wish to discuss policies, without enforcement by penalties, should start another thread. Maybe if I didn't keep getting unfairly attacked, Phi, I wouldn't have to do 'damage control' . even though I'm right. And I wouldn't be getting pissed off !

I'm not offended; I'm pissed off.

You make a comment which is directly aimed at my previous post, INow. Accusing me of going out of my way to offend people, while being a snowflake; then, when called on it, your response is feigned innocence, and "Dafuk ?". If you ( or Phi ) have opinions about my behavior, stick to them. I'm NOT a snowflake and not easily offended. Pretending that you don't know what I mean is childish. I have gotten, and expect, better from you.