Strange

Then what is the point of this thread? You seem to be very confused. I asked you what evidence you had that the video of the Chinese compass was fake. I was the one who provided details of the fake chip you mentioned. Remember? Yes. We agree on that. So what? Why is it relevant? So what? How is this relevant? And why do you just keep posting the same thing over and over? This is a DISCUSSION forum.

Nonsense. For example: So if they import 90%, they must make 10%. So there are at least two Chinese companies designing and manufacturing chips. Both quotes from: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/semiconductors/our-insights/semiconductors-in-china-brave-new-world-or-same-old-story What point are you trying to make with these random and incoherent posts?

What evidence do you have for that? Can you explain why you think it doesn't work? I have to say that the spoon shape is a very clever way of making a low friction bearing from a material that is, I assume, quite hard to work. With the added bonus that you can use it to eat your soup afterwards! Agreed. But how is this relevant to the compass? Neither the Wikipedia page not anyone here has used this as a reference. That should be: "A Chinese microchip"

You would think that was the answer, but he insists everyone gets the $1 back. So it doesn't appear to be a subsidy.

Indeed. Pretty much every industry gets some level of subsidy for research to develop new products. Are these all equivalent to energy, or is a subsidy in the automotive industry equivalent to cars?

Is money a conserved quantity? I thought economies could grow so that everyone got wealthier. (Off topic, I know. So ignore this)

They live in the same environment from us. If such a civilisation exists (and there is no evidence for that supposition) then they may be to far away to be aware of our existence. Maybe in another galaxy. Maybe not even in our local cluster. Maybe not even in our observable universe. May be, not must be.

There is no information transferred between entangled particles. (This has been discussed many times on the forum)

How about asking a better question instead?

And everyone seems to agree that it is a poorly framed question so a yes/no answer is not possible. I’m not sure that is true if everybody gets the $1 back - then it just sounds like an over-complicated (realistic?) tax system.

I don’t think that is correct. Photons have spin but no charge.

If the same scenario applies to everyone I can’t see what definition of subsidy you think could apply. Do you mean that paying less than 100% tax is a subsidy? But I thought you were defining subsidy in terms of energy; how does that relate to tax?

So everybody pays $4, and pays $5, and pays $5 but gets $1 back. That means everyone pays $13 tax on $10 income. Either that or you haven’t understood what is meant by baseline. Either way, if everyone pays the same then there is no subsidy so I fail to see the relevance.

It was, from memory, a couple of things. Pauli proposed an (unknown) property that would distinguish pairs of electrons in order to explain observed spectral lines. Then it was suggested that particles must have angular momentum because of conservation laws. It was then realised that (quantised) angular momentum would be the property required by Pauli. The Stern-Gerlach experiment showed that angular momentum was quantised.

It is just a property that particles have. It has units of angular momentum. You could look up Pauli if you need the history.

These are not size. Size is measured in metres. In what way are mass and charge “linear”, and why is it relevant.

Because particles have zero size, there is no way it can be described in terms of classical rotation. So it is just a property they have, like mass or charge.

Apparently, some are claiming this is some sort of conspiracy. Someone even claimed George Soros was behind it

Well that didn’t take long.

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/a-potentially-game-changing-message-from-the-dawn-of-time/# https://www.nature.com/articles/nature25792?sf183244859=1 More background here: https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/02/28/588833582/did-dark-matter-make-the-early-universe-chill-out

That’s a very sad thing to hear. People totally lacking in any sense of humanity. But apart from that, there are practical benefits. Helping “third world” countries become more prosperous opens up new markets for products, for example. It also reduces the chance of regional instability which can spread and cause global problems. And also, as NortonH suggests, it would enable the people who can best help the country, to remain there to get an education and employment https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlightened_self-interest

Q. How many hipsters does it take to change a lightbulb? A. An obscure number. You’ve probably never heard of it.

Why? How do you know it was a scholar? Have you checked the Wikipedia history? The idea of sanding something that small is quite amusing It’s off-topic but if anyone is interested in the (slightly bizarre) story behind this: https://mobile.nytimes.com/2006/05/15/technology/15fraud.html?pagewanted=all

Why? You make it sound like they have only ever made one!

I agree that it could be classified as an invention, but a scientific invention? It wasn't really developed with the modern concept of science. But maybe noticing that certain materials consistently point in the same direction, if free to move, counts as basic empirical observation.