Strange

Why would that be feared? Scientists are always looking for things that "break" our current theories. New science is where the excitement and the Nobel Prizes are. The rest of your post just shows you know nothing about how science works and isn't really worth commenting on.

Such as? Care to provide some links? Said by whom? Care to provide some links? And it is not really clear what you are saying here. Of course the function of neurons is affected by genes being activated or otherwise. And of course these are "sub micron" processes. Because chemistry. That is just chemistry. Absence of any evidence?

Indeed. Apart from the fact that chemistry (and therefore the functioning of the brain) depends on quantum effects there seems no reason to ascribe the mind to mysterious quantum mysticism.

When you measure something from your frame of reference, the speed of the instrument is zero. So I don't see the relevance of your comment. It is obviously not "them" because 10,000 different observers will observe the clocks running at different speeds. The clocks (or the atoms) can't "know" and "pretend" to be running at multiple different speeds at the same time.

The nature of space-time means that measurements made from different frames of reference will vary. In other words, it is the measurements that change, not the atoms.

Do you know if he had been beaten up by someone? And, if so, that it was a police officer? Or was the whole thing imagined? Or was it by someone other than a police officer? But the whole thing could be provoked by the individual's behaviour. Even without invoking mental illness: I had a friend who was stopped by a policeman in Italy. He spoke some basic Italian and so thought things were OK. Suddenly the policeman turned quite unpleasant and the friend was taken off to the police station. He never understood what had gone wrong - had he accidentally used a bad word? Or used the informal "tu" form instead of "Lei"? Or was the officer just stroppy? We will never know.

They didn't "know" anything. It is because measurements are made from a different frame of reference. Feel free to ask the same question again and get the same answer. But it might be more productive to learn what the theory says.

It is because you are looking at them from a different frame of reference. If you were sat on the satellite it would appear to be running at normal speed.

As you admit to having been psychotic, I don't think we can take your word for that. Delusion or hallucination sounds infinitely more likely than someone actually saying these things. OK. It definitely sounds like it is happening in your head. (No shame in that.)

When I was young the laser was described as a technology looking for an application. Now they are everywhere.

The atom doesn't know anything of the sort. You are currently moving at over 99% of the speed of light relative to something; is your watch running slow? No. It is the effect of transforming coordinates from one frame of reference to another.

Possible, maybe. But you would need to provide some evidence for it to be taken seriously.

Evidence? Or just more stuff you have made up?

By "advanced" I assume you mean gullible. I have no idea if that is what he means, but it is not what it means in quantum theory. What evidence is there that he is "correct"? I assume he threw "fractal" in there as another meaningless buzz-word. Bosons can occupy the same state because they obey Bose-Einstein statistics. This has nothing to do with "dark matter receiver/senders", which seems to be a something you have made up. Evidence? How is "undetectable" different from "non-existent"? I'll conclude by cautioning readers that you are just making stuff up.

What is "the right time"? And how would you recognize it (to know if a discovery were late)?

Surely, even philosophy should be based on some level of evidence, not just making stuff up (re. the last two posts).

Yes, observers at all times will observe a universe that is cooling. That is why they will see a different temperature (and therefore age) than people at different times.

Huh? If the universe is cooler now than it was in the past, how can we not see a cooler universe than past observers? You seem to be saying that the universe has always been the same. That is contradicted by the evidence.

Of course. It says that the universe is expanding and cooling. Therefore people at different times will see a temperature with different density/temperature.

Yes, but what does it say? The big bang model says that the universe is expanding and cooling. Therefore people at different times will see a temperature with different density/temperature.

By extrapolating back from the current density. I'm not sure how you calculate this but (1) I assume you mean the observable universe and (2) my understanding is that the mass in galaxies is a small proportion of the mass of the universe (most of it is interstellar/intergalactic gas). I'm not sure what you base that on. It says that at 70,000 years matter starts to dominate the mass-energy of the universe (before that it was dominated by photons) and "at this stage, cold dark matter dominates". But it also says: "However, because present theories as to the nature of dark matter are inconclusive, there is as yet no consensus as to its origin at earlier times, as currently exist for baryonic matter." So it is not known how early dark matter originated. Note that dark energy would have been a far smaller proportion then, than it is now. Why do you think it is not part of the calculation? The presence of dark matter is important in models of the early universe as well as the simulations of galaxy/large structure formation linked earlier. For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter#Cosmic_microwave_background

So you are extrapolating from the name rather than looking at what the theory says.

Why would you think that? A fundamental part of the model is that the universe is expanding and cooling. So observers in future will see a cooler universe (a more greatly red-shifted CMB) and therefore a different age.

You mean why is the speed of light the same for all observers? Who knows; it is just the way the universe works.

Wouldn't it be easier for people to just go to bookdepository.com or abebooks.com or barnesandnoble.com or amazon.com or ...?