Strange

Note that this description of the Higgs mechanism is just a crude analogy. The "cocktail party" analogy (which it seems to be based on) is due to Peter Higgs, but it isn't clear to me that it is an accurate description of the mathematical model. On the other hand, I don't think it is possible to give a clear description of the model!

That isn't complex, either. Or, at least, it doesn't help me understand what you mean by "complex". Can you provide any references that would help explain your use of the word? Given your random sequence, we can say certain things about the distribution of patterns within it (depending on how the random numbers are generated, with what probability distribution), information entropy, and so on.

But the reason that the Higgs mechanism was proposed was to explain the mass of particles. So it seems odd to say its purpose might be wrong. Photons have energy but not mass. Mass and energy are both causes of (and affected by) gravity/spacetime-curvature.

Sounded perfectly reasonable to me. Sounds like the definition of "anecdotal evidence" to me. How would I know, why would I care, and how is it relevant? What are you talking about? You claimed that garlic would mean no one ever got the common cold. Then you referenced a paper which did NOT support that claim (it showed that some people might get some benefit). Now you seem to be saying that garlic makes things worse. Oh, I see. It is a straw man argument. No one said garlic makes things worse. But there is no evidence that it will provide 100% protection for 100% of people as you claimed. [p.s. just saw the mod note. Hope the above doesn't count as bickering. ]

Someone as young as you should be able to make good progress - with some hard work. What puts me off a more rigorous study is not just the hard work involved but also the fact I probably don't have enough time (or brain cells) left to get very far! Gerard 't Hooft has a good page (now a website) on the subjects you need to study, with some sources: http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~gadda001/goodtheorist/

True. Although I don't think it is quite as simple as "space rotating" (I don't really understand the maths around it) and I'm not sure how it relates to the angular momentum of the black hole. (It applies to all rotating masses.) I keep thinking of it as the Len Stirring effect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lense%E2%80%93Thirring_precession

Although (as far as I know) the only reason he left university was to start the company (and his parents supported him in the decision) so its not quite like someone who just gave up schooling at 15 or something. Also the Gary KIldall story sounds a bit like a myth (I haven't heard it before). IBM and Digital Research were involved in negotiations for some time before IBM walked away and went to MicroSoft (as it was then). And CP/M was available for PCs for a few years but it was initially overpriced and never really gained enough market share.

I don't know what you mean by area or volume of curvature. The curvature caused mass-energy extends infinitely (in principle). The Gullstrand-Painlevé coordinates can be thought of in that way. http://www.physicspages.com/2013/11/24/painleve-gullstrand-global-rain-coordinates/ http://jila.colorado.edu/~ajsh/insidebh/waterfall.html I'm not sure you can say the event horizon is spinning, after all it isn't a "thing". The black hole has angular momentum, but I'm not sure you can say where that "is", any more than you can say where the mass is. It clearly has an effect (as seen in the calculation of gravitational waves) but it won't be that simply because we are dealing with something that can only be described using GR (the Lorentz transform only applies in locally flat [Minkowski] space-time).

So these are not complex in any sense of the word I am familiar with. You have described a simple calculation and an algorithm which runs in linear time. I though you might at least suggest an algorithm in NP. So I fail to see how the decimal expansion of some numbers having an infinite number of digits, or that you can describe an infinite sequence of random digits, means that "all theories are true". There seems to be a logical leap here.

The idea that you think a random anecdote has any relevance to the discussion. I find it hard to believe that politicians and people ringing talk shows here would have been affected in any way by the educational system in the USA. Apparently, according to you, it said "The most of ill people around the world could simply use garlic a day, and the most common ills are gone/never appear."

Then you will have to define what you mean by "complexity". And if you think that "all theories can be true" then you think that contradictory theories can be true. Which is, well, an insane idea. But these things can be exactly defined. (Unlike your "complexity" which is still undefined.)

When the land gets strange, the strange get going.

Yes: using Schlieren Flow Visualization http://www.npr.org/2014/04/09/300563606/what-does-sound-look-like

I am very, very disappointed to see a statement like this on a science forum, especially from one of the members who is clearly pretty bright. It is bad enough when I hear morons and politicians on the radio saying things like, "The government has no right to tax cigarettes [sugar/alcohol/whatever], my grandfather smoked 300 a day for 130 years and was still running four marathons a day". Don't these people understand anything about the nature of evidence?

People are Strange.

Or one of those dreams where you ... Oh, just me then.

Saying the same thin doesn't really help me understand what you mean. How are you defining complex? How do you measure that? And can that measure become infinite? I am fairly sure the phlogiston theory is not true. And, although Newtonian gravity works under most situations, it is definitely not true. But how does any of that relate to complexity, infinite or otherwise?

The black hole has mass (ignoring the complexities). That is all you know / need to know. You can't know "where" that mass is (if it is anywhere) with our current theories and it makes no difference. And gravity isn't like light. It doesn't have to "get out". The mass of the black hole causes (or *is*) the curvature that we call gravity.

Fuzzball

Why is this in Speculations, and not Biology?

What do you mean by "infinitely complex"?

If there is any such thing as a singularity.

Gosh. Look at that. Another factual error. What a surprise. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Hoyle

This is because the pages are created dynamically. There isn't a website with thousands of pages of endless discussions. The pages are only created when someone looks at them. (Which might be a deep analogy for quantum mechanics )

The problem with this is that you don't seem to want to go beyond "there is something very interesting going on here". You could research what others have found out about similar phenomena. You could record the varying weather and water conditions when you see this effect and try and understand it yourself. But you seem to have ignored any attempts at explanation or suggestions for research, and just gone off on a tangent about the relationship between science and engineering (and the history of certain tehchnologies). Do you prefer leaving things unexplored and mysterious, rather than trying to understand them? (So a type D, that is not in your list?)