Strange

Only if it is radiated.

I'm not sure what supernova explosions could tell us about the mass of dark matter. For one thing, the amount of dark matter in and around a star is very small. It is only because dark matter is spread throughout the galaxy that its total mass is so large. Also, the dark matter in a star will not interact significantly with the exploding material (other than very slightly increasing the mass of the star). And, I don't think we can calculate the expected behaviour of a supernova accurately enough to detect any unexpected behaviour. The mass (and distribution) of dark matter is calculated from the observed effect on the rotational speeds of galaxies (and relative speeds of galaxies in clusters, and gravitational lensing).

You still haven't explained why you want to do this. All the particles are identical, so why does it matter which one it was? Also, why go to all the trouble of storing them. Why not just generate them when you need them?

I know. And that is the problem. There is not. And that is perhaps why you are confused by the fact it takes light a finite time to travel to us from a star. According to whom? Or, better, in what frame of reference? Of course, practically, that is irrelevant as the error bars on that estimate are far larger than any difference in the age that might be measured by different observers. But the principle is the same: different observers will come up with different times since some event. And, in fact, for some observers, the event will not have happened yet. No, but GR does. That depends on how you want to define "happen" or "exist". With no clear definition of those, I imagine someone would end up very confused. Whose past?

That is an (published but not granted) application.

Ah, it is a version of Goldbach's conjecture, then? 90 can be written as the sum of two primes in 14 different ways: https://oeis.org/A045917

That patent is quite amusing. It will never be granted in its current form.

In the context of the original post, I took it to mean "the same Language, Race, Religion and Political philosophy." If that is not the case, it would be helpful for the OP to clarify. Exactly. Nationality has nothing to do with ethnicity (or language or religion or ...)

210 gives the longest run of arithmetic primes currently known. So it is not surprising that you find a lot of primes +/- 210. I think you mean 13 + 197 (197-13 = 184). Otherwise you need to explain what that minus sign is doing there.

I think that is a bit unfair. It looks like sunshaker has stumbled on a particular case of arithmetic progression of primes: http://mathworld.wolfram.com/PrimeArithmeticProgression.html The other thing that sunshaker's (rather incomprehensible) diagrams remind me of, is Ulam's spiral: http://mathworld.wolfram.com/PrimeSpiral.html

Perhaps 90 is a good fit for the typical spacing between primes in this sort of range? Primes become sparser as they become larger so, presumably, for primes above 10,000 (for example) you would need a larger number to find primes in this way.

Note that that is a single study and is about occupational exposure (i.e. to vapors and dust). I have not yet seen any evidence that you will absorb any significant quantity of aluminium from normal use of cooking utensils. The main source of dietary aluminium is probably from tea.

The frequency of any generated voltage would, I assume, be the same as the applied stimulus. Although it looks like bone is only piezoelectric (if it is) at kilohertz frequencies: http://silver.neep.wisc.edu/~lakes/BoneElectr.html

So it seems you mean 90+7 and 90-7? Or do you mean -(7+90)? But these are not "multiples" of -7, anyway. I think you need to standardise (or clarify) your terminology. I don't see how it can be other people's fault when you use standard mathematical symbols to have some special, private meaning that you haven't explained

Some info here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromosome_2_%28human%29 And a better discussion here: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2012/07/19/the-mystery-of-the-missing-chromosome-with-a-special-guest-appearance-from-facebook-creationists/

As with hydrogen, pretty much all the neutrinos in existence were created in the big bang. In the same way that there is the cosmic microwave background (which is one of the best indicators of the age and nature of the universe) there should also be a cosmic microwave background. This would have emerged about 380,000 years ealier and would probably tell us a lot about the early universe. Unfortunately, we are (currently) unable to detect such low energy neutrinos. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_neutrino_background

The first part of that doesn't appear to be true: http://mic.com/articles/89717/45-surprising-facts-about-extreme-poverty-around-the-world-you-may-not-have-realized Whether you can do anything about your personal situation, or the world's, is more difficult to answer. Maybe if you joined one of the many organizations looking to tackle poverty you could make a difference. It might make you feel better about your own life too.

It is a bit like hoping to win the lottery when the machine is filled with 47 identical matt black balls.

More importantly, t=0 in the big bang model is a singularity so talking about "before" this has no more meaning than asking what is north of the north pole. (As an aside, I have debated tar's concept of time before and, apart from the fact it makes no sense, he is unwilling to consider any alternative or any evidence that might contradict his ideas.)

Thanks for that interesting aside on American history, which nicely confirms the fact that the USA is not, and never has been, homogeneous. Maybe you should ask your optician for glasses with slightly less of a rose tint. You may be forgetting all the Japanese American brothers who were put into prison camps. And there was quite a strong anti-war movement before and after Pearl Harbour. I seem to remember reading that the conspiracy theories (that Roosevelt knew about, or even arranged, the attack) started almost immediately - probably more as a way of attacking the President, rather than a credible theory.

Maybe you need to study quantum theory so you can actually calculate what the results of the experiment will be (as was done for all the other variations). You miss the point: all the particles are identical. What is the point of being able to select a particular pair of particles? Why do you want to store entangled pairs in boxes? Why not just generate them as you need them?

No, 90 - 7 = 83 And 90 - 11 = 79

There is no such thing as an isolated event, in the quantum world especially where entangled particles are concerned. What is the significance of that? How does it do that? I don't think it is possible to have a box of entangled particles. Their interactions will destroy any entanglement. (You certainly can't buy such from a supplier.) All particles (of a given type) are identical so I have no idea how you are going to put serial numbers on them. Also, what is the significance of being able to select a particular particle pair? And it is not clear what you are doing with the pair? Are you sending them both through the slits? Or just one?

That is, effectively, what the delayed-choice experiment does (if I understand you correctly). Nothing. It just says that quantum effects are non-local in time as well as space. It can't be used as an argument for predeterminism.

This section appears to have no connection to the big bang theory, not to any theory of abiogenesis I have heard of. We have learned a lot since then (the big bang model did not even exist at the time). The evidence for the big bang theory is overwhelming (but the theory says nothing about the origin of life). Where on earth did you hear such a theory. The only theory I have heard is that they evolved here. Meteorites formed in our solar system and have not travelled millions of light years. The evidence show us it is true.