MigL

I'm good with a lot of things. You, on the other hand, seem to be one of those always angry people who stomps his feet when he doesn't get his way. Have a nice day.

Well he is the current Prime Minister. And being directly relevant to the preceding conversation, why wouldn't I ??? To which you replied "But what about S Harper". And so it started... Me ? I'm going back on topic. You do what you want.

What was that ? Sorry, I didn't hear you. Busy killing whales in my back yard. No point talking to Rangerx; he'll just accuse me of killing Canada geese. But the fact remains, CharonY, that BC is already serviced by a TransCanada pipeline. The consultation criteria for the EXPANSION of that pipeline were not met, and it was halted by the Supreme Court of Canada. Rangerx can stomp his feet all he wants, but if the Government decides to to its due diligence with consultations, the Supreme Court will approve it. The alternative is to buy foreign oil. And the fact that Rangerx thinks BC does neither, means he believes in magic. I didn't make this a Harper vs Trudeau contest. Rangerx did. And I've never claimed S Harper was a likeable person; he is rather stand-offish with the press, and other groups. I claimed he was a smart and sensible economist ( compare how Canada did following the 2008 collapse to the US and other countries ), and I claimed he had more international clout. Do you have an argument with that ?

Recently visited my aunt in Zurich, prior to my Italian vacation, and went into a little café by the Zurich Polytechnic. I was told that this café was frequented by A Einstein during breaks. I forget the name of the café, but maybe Eise can confirm ?

I didn't ask where BC DOESN'T get its oil from, Rangerx. I asked where DOES it get it from. And the fact that you won't answer speaks volumes. Stubborn ( and convinced you're always right ) authoritarianism. Shifting the conversation away and twisting it into something it's not. Fixed your statement so that it applies to you. And just so the rest of the membership knows which of us is actually hiding facts... "The Trans Mountain Pipeline delivers crude oil and refined petroleum products from Edmonton, Alberta to Kamloops, Burnaby, and the U.S. Trans Mountain has a current system capacity of 300 Mb/d." from https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/nrg/ntgrtd/mrkt/nrgsstmprfls/bc-eng.html It is the expansion to the pipeline that has hit a snag. Also, if anyone s interested, BC is the biggest supplier of goods and services to the Alberta "Tar Sands" oil reserves https://www.capp.ca/media/news-releases/british-columbia-top-supplier-to-oil-sands Sounds like BC wants all the benefits, but doesn't want to dirty its own hands.

Again... "Wouldn't these properties of the 'void' be measurable, and provide some observational evidence ?"

You still haven't explained where BC gets its oil from...

This 'distinction', where you see particles with classical trajectories not really moving, but their properties translating due to the interactions of a multitude of intermediate particles already present in the 'void', would require an extremely large particle density, and an equally large void energy. Wouldn't these properties of the 'void' be measurable, and provide some observational evidence ?

THIS was the original post by me... "THAT's what you don't like about J Trudeau, Rangerx ? The pipelines which would avoid buying from the Middle East ? Not the fact that he tries to influence the justice system to benefit those who donate to the Liberal party ? Not the fact that he shuts down inquiries into his abuses of power ? Not the fact that he promised Proportional Representation until he won a majority ? Not the bungled Air Force jet acquisition ( which we are part of the program due to a previous Liberal government ) but, to save face he is stalling until after his mandate, at which point, the same jet will be bought ? Not the fact that he champions women's rights, yet he groped a woman 18 yrs ago, and claims his recollection is different from hers ? Need I go on ? I'm no fan of A Sheer, the NDP are now trailing the Greens in public support, and J Trudeau may well get re-elected. But the 'knuckle dragger' S Harper had way more sense, international clout and intelligence than our current 'drama teacher' ( and father's coat-tail riding ) Prime Minister." After which you went on a rant about S Harper, and claimed he sold SNC-Lavelin to the Saudis. Totally unrelated 'whataboutism', intended to obfuscate.

"That's how you conservatives do things. By gaslight and bullshit." And still you don't address any of the points I've made. Just resort to labeling and name-calling. Throw a childish temper tantrum, why don't you.

I would think Mordred is trying to impress upon you the amount of mathematics involved in just the 'set-up' for any viable theory. Never mind the actual theory itself. A 'theory' is not something whipped up in a couple of paragraphs of written words.

And yet, none of what you posted makes the statement "Harper sold SNC-Lavelin to the Saudis" true, Rangerx. Meanwhile J Trudeau wants to defer their prosecution on the bribery scandal, and threw a native, woman Attorney General under the bus, all to spare a generous Liberal donor and protect seats in Quebec. Where does BC get their oil from, if it doesn't come by tanker or the unbuilt pipeline ? Does it magically appear in your storage tanks ? You know damn well, if it doesn't come from within Canada, it comes from the middle east. And I can write a list, just as long about J Trudeau's 4 yrs in office as you did about S Harper's nearly 10 yrs. Yet only S Harper is accused of being a 'Boogey Man" and evil incarnate. Bit of a double standard wouldn't you say ? ( actually YOU probably would not )

So, you can't control your impulses and you want the government to do it for you ?

"How about SNC Lavalin...oops Harper sold that to the Saudi's. right?" That's news to... just about everyone ! When did this happen ? How about making up some more stuff to slander S Harper ?

So, tankers at your ports are OK, along with the spills they may cause, but a pipeline regulated by Canadian laws is too risky ? And I don't recall mentioning O Khadr. Why not address the points I DID make ?

THAT's what you don't like about J Trudeau, Rangerx ? The pipelines which would avoid buying from the Middle East ? Not the fact that he tries to influence the justice system to benefit those who donate to the Liberal party ? Not the fact that he shuts down inquiries into his abuses of power ? Not the fact that he promised Proportional Representation until he won a majority ? Not the bungled Air Force jet acquisition ( which we are part of the program due to a previous Liberal government ) but, to save face he is stalling until after his mandate, at which point, the same jet will be bought ? Not the fact that he champions women's rights, yet he groped a woman 18 yrs ago, and claims his recollection is different from hers ? Need I go on ? I'm no fan of A Sheer, the NDP are now trailing the Greens in public support, and J Trudeau may well get re-elected. But the 'knuckle dragger' S Harper had way more sense, international clout and intelligence than our current 'drama teacher' ( and father's coat-tail riding ) Prime Minister. PS Its about time we discussed some Canadian politics. I'm getting tired of talking Trump.

JC and I shouldn't comment any further... Canada is technically at war with Denmark over Hans Island, which straddles the boundaries between Greenland and Canada. Hostilities are on-going. The Danes plant their flag on the island, and leave a bottle of Shnapps. The Canadians plant our flag and leave a bottle of Canadian Club ( rye whiskey ). No casualties yet.

Greenland has been moving towards independence . And both Russia and China have increased their Arctic 'presence'. This may just be a way to check their moves in the area. I wonder... If D Trump does buy Greenland, will the Danes pay for it ? ( like Mexico and the wall )

I assume you mean Bekenstein bound or limit, Mordred. Jacob Bekenstein, of Bekenstein-Hawking Black Hole entropy fame.

String theory is an attempt at modelling our reality as per the scientific method, and is subject to all the constraints of said method. In simulation, however, our reality IS the model in someone else's reality. IOW you could call simulation a theory in that other reality, but not in ours. We ( and our reality ) would simply be the model. IE not the same thing at all.

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 ?