Genady

You can count any independent variable as 'dimension', if you wish.

But it was not a problem in these countries say, 100 years ago. Did air become thicker there since then?

Generally, they don't, AFAIK: Netherlands - Dual Citizenship (dualcitizenshipreport.org) The circumstances when it is allowed, don't apply to me. This is my reason not to apply. OTOH, I'm quite sure that military conscription doesn't apply to me either. Except for very old people, everyone speaks Dutch here, mostly fluently. It is one of the two official languages. Public schools are in Dutch. Etc. People born here are Dutch nationals by birth. BTW, English is semi-official, and most people here speak it, too. AFAIK, the 'civic integration exam' is not required for applicants over 65 years old. Would there be any advantage to me as I am retired?

It turned out that I am eligible for the Dutch citizenship. I know a reason not to apply for it, but in case I am missing something, is there a reason to apply for it?

"Abby Normal"

I see, thank you. I couldn't figure out what 'this' in the beginning of the paragraph refers to.

Is there?

Thank you for the review. Well said. +1 Has solved my dilemma: to click or not to click.

Yep, I like to add a pinch of it here and there. I don't find it disgusting.

This is a strong criticism. The other direction of criticism that I see is based on Machine Learning success. Perhaps it is not how humans learn languages, but anyway it shows experimentally that there are alternative, not rule based ways to learn.

Yes, it does. Thank you. Only needed to google 'Hugo and Berlitz'. Are you familiar with a very funny 'Wicked' languages series? E,g,. Wicked French for the Traveler: Tomb, Howard: 9780207166655: Amazon.com: Books

I'm sorry, but because of a form of APD I cannot decipher words of songs in any of four languages that otherwise I don't have difficulties to understand.

I suspect that for any linguistic rule we can come up with, there exists an extant or an extinct language that breaks it.

But if it is not the case - and I think, it is not - then the questions and the answers are elsewhere.

To learn language and to learn meaning of words are not the same thing. Dogs can do the latter but not the former. Also consider that dogs in China and dogs in France understand each other's communication. OTOH, people speaking Chinese and people speaking French don't understand each other's language. However, like the dogs, they understand each other's communication. It is not difficult to see how we can learn the meaning of words related to things and actions that are here-now. It is not so easy to see how to learn the meaning of words such as 'yesterday' or 'side'.

We only see the light that goes from the object into our eyes. We don't see light that goes elsewhere.

See how dogs learn to understand humans.

It always was so in GR. It was so in Riemannian geometry as well, in the form of any manifold being indistinguishable from a flat surface in infinitesimally small neighborhood of a point.

Gravity and acceleration are indistinguishable in a system which is infinitesimally small in space and time.

Gravity is synonym of spacetime being curved. No matter how creatively system moves, it will not curve spacetime and will not simulate gravitational tidal forces.

This is incorrect. No tidal forces - no gravity. And vice versa.

It cannot.

Acceleration of an observer or of a frame of reference does not cause spacetime curvature. Tidal forces are manifestation of curvature.

But they are not the same. Gravity is spacetime curvature. Acceleration is not.

Yes, that's it. King Willem Alexander's Birthday is a public holiday here. Lots of orange colors on that day.