npts2020

What I have read about platinum catalyst substitutes is in regard to fuel cells so not sure how any would work for what you are asking about but "they" are coming up with them. The problem is, I don't see ATM how a hunk of nickel encased in a sheath of nitrogen doped carbon fiber like this, https://engineering.wisc.edu/news/not-so-precious-new-discovery-could-replace-expensive-platinum-in-hydrogen-fuel-cells/ , would be any easier to get than the platinum.

It is surprising to me that the insurance industry hasn't managed to kill DST yet. Whether the actual figure is 20% or not outside of Saskatchewan, the trend does seem pretty universal. https://www.insurancebusinessmag.com/us/risk-management/news/daylight-saving-time-sparks-20-surge-in-claims-46791.aspx "In fact, collision data from 2014 shows a marked 20 per cent surge in claims in the days after the time change."

In 1970 we never put a tap in our maple trees before the first week of March and rarely missed any significant sap run. These days if you aren't tapped by mid-February, you missed or are missing the first hard run and even then you may have missed earlier ones that season, something that I don't remember ever happening prior to the last couple of decades.

Why should this be true? What makes the visible universe spherical is that the limits on the speed of light are the same in every direction, AFAIK there is no spherical symmetry to the mass in the visible universe, what would make it symmetrical outside of it?

You can definitely graft peaches on apricot trees or vice versa but peach trees are one of the harder trees to graft onto. In general, if trees are in the same genus, they are can be grafted to each other. (disclaimer; the only trees I have ever grafted are apples, chestnuts and maples and the latter two only for experimental purposes)

Surprised nobody has mentioned scent as a possible reason. Why is it that most people like the scent of roses? I never wanted to eat one but the smell of cliff roses blooming in the high desert left a pretty strong impression on me.

Depends what is meant by "a new phase". Humanity is already dealing with significant consequences, the only real question is how much more catastrophic will they have to become before a serious effort to address the problem is made.

Which leads to the question of "exactly what is time and how does it apply to the universe?". It seems pretty obvious time applies to humans because, so far, all of them have a pretty definably observed beginning and end but we only have a single universe of which we have seen neither the beginning nor end, or even much of the in between (if there is such a thing). If I have "invoked a creator or the supernatural", please post the quote. My bet is that once we figure out a reliable way of measuring gravitational effects from bodies outside our visible universe on bodies inside our visible universe, its size and age will increase greatly.

AFAICT the universe is eternal. As to switching expansion on and off (if it even switches on and off), figuring that out would advance our understanding of cosmology as much as learning the heavens don't revolve around the Earth. When I try to visualize your proposition, all I come up with is something similar to tides. Our biggest problem is the entirety of human existence is such a small fraction of even the known age of the universe and our ability to effectively measure and study its change a tiny fraction of that existence (assuming we can do it at all). It seems to me Hubble, Webb and most other space missions have helped us take a giant step in understanding how things work but also have raised as many questions as they have answered.

I'm pretty sure I never said expansion was eternal, only possibly the universe. If you can't distinguish between the two propositions, I will be happy to elucidate. And that assumes we can see and measure the limits of our universe, a demonstrably untrue notion as shown by your use of the word "observable". In order to have an "origin" point, one needs to explain how all of the laws of physics had been broken by making something from nothing at 13.8 billion years ago or any other time. When the choice is something from nothing or a timeless universe, I tend towards the latter. If there is a third choice, I would like to know about it but all of the origin explanations (besides supernatural ones) I have seen lead back to one or the other.

Not sure what "Green Deal" you are talking about but the original platform for a Green New Deal as proposed by the Green Party in 2006 says nothing about CO2 certificate emissions or anything of the ilk. I would be interested in knowing what part(s) of it you feel are "a fraud", other than the fact that any action on it will have been put off for nearly 2 decades already. Here is a text of the document. https://www.gp.org/green_new_deal

This could be an interesting discussion on its own but if you believe modern cosmologists, there is a point where the universe (possibly the majority of it) is expanding away from us faster than the speed of light. It seems to me, that would explain why the entire sky isn't bright and does little to show whether the universe is infinite or not.

What makes you think the universe was "made up" and hasn't always existed? Just because you have a linear existence with a fairly definable beginning and end because of time, doesn't mean the universe must behave in a similar manner. Personally, I have a lot more faith in the laws of conservation of matter and energy than I do in the relevance of time in relation to the universe as a whole.

I think this is a great idea. IMO the US ought to require that all products and services bought or sold in this country follow US law from exploration to discovery, extraction, refinement, fabrication, assembly, transport, storage and sale. However, it seems the longer it takes to do this, the less effective it will be as the US loses its former stranglehold on world trade. How different would the world be today if this had been done 60 or 70 years ago?

Welcome to the forum willferral. Unfortunately, I don't know enough about chemistry to help you but there are several people here quite knowledgeable on the topic who might. You did post in the appropriate place.