Moontanman

Here are revised pictures.

I am trying to see it from your perspective but my head won't go quite that far up my ass. Right now, in the USA, a tiny group of people own practically all the wealth, they own our government and regular people are being pitted against each other by the governments owners to distract them from what is happening. Anyone who says that capitalism protects property rights free enterprise must be one of the 1%. Romantic notions about communism are as flawed as romantic notions about capitalism. Neither system will work without checks and balances not to mention that most governments that are successful in the long term are a mixture of both... You say In what country has this ever been true? If you think it's the USA you haven't been paying attention. Then you say Can you support this assertion? I admit that totalitarianism is a terrible system but such governments can indeed exist as capitalistic, or communistic. Are you asserting that socialism and communism is the same thing? If so we can trivially falsify that because the US has a capitalism/socialism mix.. Human rights and private property can be had under either system but not in a system that has no checks and balances. Capitalism in no more deserving of uncritical acceptance than communism. -

I've been googling this to death and I can't find any info on this so it might be possible it's a new concept. But here goes! What if the status of the cosmos at T=0 was an all encompassing now. Time was just another spatial dimension and time did not pass. At the moment of the Big Bang time symmetry was broken resulting in the release of energy bound up in that static time dimension. This break in symmetry resulted in time as we know it and time's arrow. But, and yeah this is pure speculation, if the expansion of the big bang resulted in two universes expanding in two opposite time dimensional directions? Matter goes in one time direction and antimatter goes in the other time direction. In one direction matter predominates and in the other time direction antimatter predominates. An observer in either universe would see time progressing from the past to the future but if a person was somehow transported to the other universe compared he would see time traveling normal but his body would be made of antimatter compared to anything in that universe. Matter of opposite charge could be made in either and conform the time direction of that universe. (times like this I really wish I has studied math) This what it would look like to an outside observer.

I'm not so sure you can make that claim with any right of veracity. Early USA, and before were basically capitalist yet they went on the murder millions under the excuse of divine right. I am of the Humble opinion that no ideology can be given absolute power without horrific things happening. Pure capitalism results in a tiny oligarchy controlling all the wealth and the common folk becoming totally owned by those with money and power. The very same thing can be said of Communism, such absolute ideologies tend to transfer wealth and power to a small group while crushing everyone else. Any government must have capitalism to grow and socialism to protect the common man from the people who would seek to control everything. A mixture of ideologies that take the good points of both unbridled capitalism and unbridled socialism and discard the parts that allow a small number of people to control everything. Arguing about which is better is like arguing that being actively tortured to death is better than being locked in a cell until you die of neglect. In both cases you end up dead...

Some estimates I've seen assert the Sun will gradually make the Earth uninhabitable as few as 500,000 years, others put it closer to a billion years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_of_Earth

Osmium?

Good to see you back Mike!

An energy release so powerful physicists considered keeping it a secrete. Fusing two bottom quarks release 8 times as much energy as hydrogen fusion! https://www.livescience.com/60847-charm-quark-fusion-subatomic-hydrogen-bomb.html?

Another thing that needs to be said, if you want to to love more than one person, are you willing to love someone who loves someone else as well?

Ugly like beauty is not only in the eye of the beholder but looks are a fleeting thing and only last in the vast majority of cases for a short amount of time. If a person expects to find someone who looks past their current appearance that person must be willing to do the same. As for money, if a person marries for money then they have missed the point of love. Love is not based on money or looks, it's difficult to describe but I know it when I feel it. I love many people, it seems to me the OP may be mistaking desire for love but none the less loving ore than one person is quite common... as is desiring more than one person...

My point here is that while sharks are large streamlined predators, a large streamlined predator is not a shark... WE agree on that point. The point about Starfish and cuttlefish is that the term fish is meaningless in the classification of life, this is not just me being pedantic, fish is as worthless as reptile as a classification and science does indeed agree with me! Or to be more precise I am agreeing with science on this... But yes we could expect streamlined animals to live in water but to say they could even remotely be classified as "fish" is quite a stretch. Even back bones is not a given, hence the example of cephalopods swimming like fish and taking on the torpedo shape... I just think it is a mistake to assume alien life would resemble earth life in anything but the broadest possible definition... It's difficult to imagine how life on other planets might evolve but a good way to understand is to go back to the fossil record and look at what extinct animals who occupied the same niches as modern life looked like. If this one little animal had not made it through the cambrian extinction none of the vertebrate aquatic predators we are familiar with would not be here...

Never heard of that show, I guess it doesn't play here in the states.

I agree, on Earth dolphins use objects as tools and so do octopus... By your definition, all of these are sharks, yet none are. Big toothy fish shaped predators? Of course. Something that you could call a shark, no way... Are Starfish fish? How about cuttlefish?

My point here is that A shark is a highly derived animal. It's not a fish, it has many unique characteristics that make it a shark. No bones, dermal denticles instead of scales, special gill structures, it's teeth, it's sensory organs, not to mention it's reproductive system. Fish is really no longer used as anything but a colloquial term and is meaningless in classification. A shark is as different from a tuna as a dolphin is from an ichthyosaur. Maybe i am just being pedantic but to expect an animal to evolve on another planet that is anything but similar in shape to Earth life is unreasonable... BTW, fingerprints do not make humans and koalas the same in any way. A human is as far removed from a koala as a bird is from a alligator... And one more thing, some cephalopods are quite fish like when they are swimming, they morph their body shape to allow them to swim more efficiently.

Really guys? Sharks are defined by their shape? Really? It wouldn't have taken very much for there not to be vertebrates at all much less Sharks. Are you aware of all the really odd fish that have evolved and gone extinct? A fish shape? Shure, but anything we would call a shark? No way! Would you call a ichthyosaur a dolphin? Would you call a seal or sea lion a shark? How about a manatee or dugong? Would you call a bat a bird? or a pterosaur a bird?

We will not find any of Earth's animals or plants anyplace else due to their ecosystem and evolutionary history being totally unconnected to ours. Sharks are such highly derived animals I would think the chances of finding them would be similar to finding humans on another planet..

I love this! Anyone know what science fiction novel inspired this album cover? My home town!

Male elephants have anal intercourse, in fact it has been asserted that many male elephants never have sex with females at all... Sheep, many other animals pair bond in same sex relationships. See the link below... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals

I was not considering a non standard base pairs and other differences but you make a good point. It is a point of debate as to whether or not alien diseases would affect us, I would suggest a less extreme approach but we have no data points to guide us at this time. Life on Titan interests me greatly, if there is life on Titan it would be a second genesis of life in one solar system. This would indicate statistically life must be very common or at least wildly more diverse than we know. Unless they reproduce with variation they could not be said to be alive but it is a good point as well...

Can you give a citation to go with that assertion? I doubt very much if we will find a planet exactly like Earth anywhere. A rocky planet with water is about as close as you can expect. I personally doubt if we'll ever colonise other planets, far too many variables would have to sort out just right and then you have the problem of any native life, viruses and other pathogens, might very well overcome earth life. Coming into contact with an alien biosphere is something that could be dangerous and judging from the way life on earth exchanges genetic material via virus infection and other virus interactions the effects of an alien biosphere might not become apparent for generations. Any and all alien intelligences will be non human. Do you expect humans to evolve on another planet? It is important to point out that there may very well be planets far more "life" friendly than the earth is. Earth life has evolved to fit Earth, on another planet gases that are poisonous to earth life H2S, CO, NH3 etc could be produced and used far more widely than on Earth. Now for a mention of my personal dog and pony show... It is, even with the technology we currently have, relatively easy to build artificial habitats circling the sun from material already in space that colonising planets like Mars might take so long as to be impractical. I think advanced beings probably would not star travel to colonise a planet that is not perfectly earth like. Easier to create earth like habitats from water and carbon containing asteroids like Ceres, or Jupiter's Trojan asteroids than it will be to star travel... In fact orbiting habitats can be made to enclose many square miles and you can put whatever you want in it. Such habitats could, within the time it takes to travel to one star, be built to house many times the populations of earth, one small habitat at a time... If you want I can point you toward a youtube account that deals with things like megastructures and stay within the lines of reality...

Check out molten salt reactors. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten_salt_reactor but the real problem on the moon is there are no rivers or seas to absorb vented waste heat. Even on Earth it takes gigantic water cooling towers to do the job...