Strange

Ah, i see what you mean now. Sounds difficult to convey (and make plausible). Wouldn’t it be easier to just have them keep the advanced technology secret? She could have the powers in charge release reports of lots of experiments with false results to send people off in the wrong direction, perhaps. Any particular reason for 1867? Start of the Austro-Hungarian Empire? Or the USA cutting off relations with the Vatican?

No, because:

That might be because you just ignored all the comments made. Some people get a bit iffy about that sort of thing. Is that a real problem? But I would have thought that posting it here (or vista, or a blog or ...) would give you as good a claim to ownership as anything else. With the benefit you might get some expert feedback. Have you looked at the other Collatz threads here? It might give you an idea of the sort of feedback you might get...

This comment might not be completely accurate. There have been some odd results from neutrino detectors that hint at the existence of a fourth type of neutrino (the "sterile neutrino"), which has been suggested as a possible candidate for dark matter. (And there could be more than one type of sterile neutrino - maybe even two as the OP suggests!) More background here: https://cosmosmagazine.com/physics/more-neutrinos-more-problems (Partly posting this in the hope that DB might come back and discuss his idea. While it has problems, it is not completely off the wall.)

I'm not sure why (or even how) anyone could do this. The whole point of postulates or axioms is that they are supposed to be self-evidently true and not need proof. They are also supposed to be few in number. How would someone start from (all?) the results proved by Euclid and work back to the postulates? Why would they do that? (Just a note: I know English is not your first language but it is usually very good. However, you have referred to the woman as "he" several times, so you might want to be a bit more careful about that.) I'm not sure how this idea of doing maths or physics "backwards" is useful to the idea of the plot. It seems it would just introduce an unnecessary complication to the story. But if it were possible now (or in Euclid's day) then it would be equally possible in 1867. (Personally, it seems impossible at any time.) And are you suggesting that the story is set in 1867 but with advanced technology such as teleporting? Or is it set in the modern day with the availability of such technology? In either case, adding a bizarre obstacle to the development of maths and science would seem to make that technology less likely, rather than more. Or have I totally missed the point of your question?

Only if the person you love is yourself, I guess. Experiments I have seen suggest pheromones don't play much of a role in human behaviour (their functions have been largely replaced by language and facial expressions, I guess).

Can you give us a summary of what that video is about? Something to do with this, maybe? https://www.politico.eu/article/poland-rule-of-law-suspended-from-eu-judicial-organization/

I thought there were some good answers. I particularly liked: Discuss it with a local maths teacher Post it here for discussion What is unsatisfactory about those?

You do realise that “John Titor” is a joke (or perhaps insane)? There is no time machine.

This seems like an incredibly complicated setup to ask a simple question. Anyway, the answer is that the change will propagate at the speed of light (or less).

Presumably they are interested in learning more about the subject. What makes you think they are looking for a job as a programmer? Computer science is much more than just programming.

Still not relevant. It seems pretty baseless https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orchestrated_objective_reduction (See the Criticism section)

This is (1) irrelevant and (2) not true. Huh!? Also untrue and, if possible, even less relevant. That is a trashy tabloid. I wouldn’t rely on it for accurate science reporting.

Can you provide a link to this study? Except none of the subjects were dead (the clue is in “near death” experiences). Yes, don’t mention that, it is irrelevant

There is no evidence for these things and, arguably, there cannot be evidence for gods. On the other hand, science cannot disprove the existence of gods either. Although it can show that some of the things that gods are supposed to have done did not actually happen.

That is the same description I linked to earlier. If you think it has confirmed your misunderstanding then clearly you haven’t seen nderstood it. It says: So the radius of the sphere that we are currently receiving photons from is 13.8 billion light years. Not “less than 1.” Obviously.

Where is this equation from?

I really wish you hadn't posted a link to that rag Here is a report from a slightly more reputable news source: http://www.bbc.com/autos/story/20161010-driving-the-saltwater-sports-car And: https://www.theskepticsguide.org/salt-water-car-not-so-fast Here is the Wikipedia age on the technology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NanoFlowcell Sounds rather implausible (and the "saltwater" claim of the Daily Scum is just stupid).

It is nothing to do with our movement. The source of the photons was about 380,000 years after the Big Bang, or about 13.8 billion years ago. Therefore about 4 billion light years away. The photons that were released here, are now 45 billion light years away. You can deny this, but all that demonstrates is your lack of understanding. You need to read some introductory texts on the Big Bang model. https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang https://www.space.com/20330-cosmic-microwave-background-explained-infographic.html https://www.space.com/33892-cosmic-microwave-background.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background In standard Big Bang cosmology, the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR) originated about 13 billion years ago. Subsequently, it will be visible at a distance of 45 billion light years from its origin.

I don't know where you get that from. The source of the radiation we are seeing is now about 45 billion light years away.

Related: http://astrokatie.blogspot.com/2018/09/extra-dimensions-black-holes-and-vacuum.html Extra dimensions, black holes, and vacuum decay, oh my Sometimes you get an idea. And it's a fun idea, and it brings together a lot of cool weird things, and you think, "maybe this could actually work out." This post is the story of one such idea. It's also the story of a paper, "Bounds on extra dimensions from micro black holes in the context of the metastable Higgs vacuum," by me and Professor Robert McNees, just posted on the arxiv. My understanding is that this only rules out large-scale extra dimensions, not the compact ("curled up") ones of string theory.

Because it is "swimming upstream." It is nothing to do with the movement of our galaxy but the expansion of the space between us and the source. Let's try this. (I haven't got time to work out the real numbers so this is just an example.) When the radiation starts out it is 4 billion light years away. After 2 billion years, it has travelled 2 billion light years. But in the meantime, the distance has increased to 6 billion light years so it still has 4 billion light years to go. After another 2 billion light years, it has travelled another 2 billion light years. But expansion has increased the distance remaining again so it has 5 billion light years to go After another 2 billion light years, it has travelled another 2 billion light years. But expansion has increased the distance remaining again so it has 4 billion light years to go And so on. It ends up taking about 14 billion light years to travel the distance (which, by now is about 45 billion light years). The place at which photons were no longer scattered is not a surface, it is the entire volume of the universe. The surface of last scattering is the sphere from which we are receiving the first photons that are no longer being scattered.

Has the Large Hadron Collider destroyed the world yet? http://www.hasthelargehadroncolliderdestroyedtheworldyet.com

There are theories that the universe may be in a metastable, "false vacuum" state. There could be multiple such states with different laws of physics. I mention this because a paper related to this has just been published and Katie Mack has just written an article about it: http://astrokatie.blogspot.com/2018/09/extra-dimensions-black-holes-and-vacuum.html

I can't quite work out what your mental image is, so it is hard to explain where you are going wrong... The surface of last scattering is a sphere, centred on us and expanding at the speed of light. The photons we see now started from the surface of last scattering 4 billion light years away and 13.8 billion years ago. It took them 13.8 billion years to travel that 4 billion light years because the expansion of the universe means they had an ever increasing distance to travel - a bit like running up the down escalator. There is no reflection involved. I'm not sure why you think there would be.