pzkpfw

At this point, all you have still, is argument from incredulity. Why is this a "problem"?

Because the Universe is changing and they are observing at different times, yes, that's possible. Will you answer my questions? 1. Do you think an observer of the Universe 1 hour after the BB would see the same thing we do now? 2. In your scenario, how would the hypothetical me be asking the other about the BB? Where did I get information from that he didn't have?

"Silly" is your emotional interpretation of the situation, that's not science. In your scenario, how would the hypothetical me be asking the other about the BB? Where did I get information from that he didn't have? If you have evidence that the cosmological principle is wrong today, present it. If you have evidence that the cosmological principle would be wrong for observers in the future, present it. NB: that observers in the future might observe a "different" Universe than observers today, is not a violation of the cosmological principle.

Nope, I'm saying that because the universe is changing the Universe will look different at different times. Your quote from wiki that you based the above on was: "the universe looks the same whoever and wherever you are" ... note that that does not say "whenever". Question: do you accept the "big bang theory"? Follow-up: do you think an observer of the Universe 1 hour after the BB would see the same thing we do now?

Pick a random spot on Earth. Maybe you pick a desert. Or a mountain top. Or the arctic. Or a rain forest. A single random choice does not have to match any other. The Universe is changing. The particular time we happen to be observing it - we simply see what we see. Your idea that "all random points should observe roughly the same thing" relies on the Universe being static and unchanging.

Right now our Moon is the "right" distance from Earth to cause (sometimes) a full eclipse of the Sun. But its distance from Earth is changing; people at another time won't see eclipses the way we do now. Is that "fair"? Is it a "trick"? Neither. May as well say it's amazing that the number 73 is where it is, on the infinite integer number line.

Is this for homework?

So many words, so little content.

Is it time to clarify weight vs mass?

For electric cars, regenerative braking helps charge batteries to get the car back up the hill. There's no one size fits all solution. Some of this reminds me of all the proposals I was seeing in the newspaper, after 9/11. The issue of how to get many people quickly down and out of tall buildings. Don't know if any of the ideas ever got implemented.

Take the simpler A = B, just to save some typing. This can be manipulated to A - B = 0 and also to B - A = 0. Sure. In neither case has A or B been made negative ... Say A = 2, so of course B = 2, to make A = B true. From the manipulations: A - B = 2 - 2 = 0, and B - A = 2 - 2 = 0. All good. In neither case was A or B itself made negative. e.g. If in A - B you think B is negative, you'd end up with 2 - -2 = 2 + 2 = 4 (not zero!). Your math reasoning is faulty, then you take it on a wild ride.

While you are running code, i.e. in debug mode, your IDE often won't allow editing of the source. Make sure it's really stopped, no processes left hanging, before trying to edit.

Ha! Force of habit. And time limits on editing typos ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fomalhaut Formalhaut is a star. Formalhaut b was thought to be a planet orbiting that star. Now they think it perhaps was the remains of a collision between two large bodies orbiting Formalhaut.

Now, who says it's headed towards Earth? (And IF they say that, at what speed?) Edit: of course you can hopefully see that particular quote is just rubbish.