StringJunky

Relativity of simultaneity, I think covers that.

Who is correct? This is a current dispute between a government agency and environmental group about how best to limit the spread of fires. Who has the most compelling argument? My bias is towards the enviro position: thinning down improves the parameters for good combustion, and therefore spread.

Complexifying or simplifying, it's all evolution... and nature is blind to the results.

Good. I hope it comes to something. Another thing they do is buy all shares in the shell company of someone that owns a superyacht, say, then they own the yacht and don't have to pay tax on the sale because it's not realized for tax purposes.

Objects with mass are not allowed to reach c (light speed) because you end up with infinities of mass and energy to get there.

Have a look this US Forestry Service article: https://www.fs.usda.gov/visit/fall-colors/science-of-fall-colors

If you haven't got anything substantive to say, don't post it. Conversing and reading with you is like trying to catch smoke.

Calling a person 'stupid' rather than specifically their behaviour gives them no avenue to rectify, since one has attacked their whole person.

The solution is global consensus on the issue and harmonizing rates, then no one can jump their responsibility. This is actually ongoing, as you probably know.

Apparently, the uber-wealthy leave their investments where they are and borrow the money because the borrowing rate is much cheaper than cashing in and paying federal/state taxes. I think there needs to be a annual review on unrealised assets that can be easily turned to cash, and subjected to federal scrutiny. It's a work-in-progress internationally, it seems.

Yeah, added a bit more to my understanding of Casimir force too. Cheers swansont.

He must be a fundamentalist islamist.

Here's the abstract and the full paper is in the link below:

60,000, it seems so with 80% of that capillaries. I just read a heart can move 3+ supertankers worth of blood in a lifetime: a million barrels.... and we are trying to make it do more!

Let's have them circulating again.... and start all over again, until it's forgotten again and...

Who are we to say what should amaze us as individuals.... very narrow-minded views, I must say. .

I don't think it would become reality. We want to be friends with you, not sleep with you. :D

Seen no news or suggestion of it here in the UK news sites or gossip.

Could it be some sort of reference target.

LOL!

Bezos has laid down the gauntlet... He's just a prominent example and very clear in what he thinks and is probably representative of companies of that size. Basically, that is what the revenue authorities are up against.

You could sue them for not containing "halved-cherries" (pl.)

I thought I'd not sent this post and deleted it. Wasn't sure if it contributed anything meaningful... but anyway. It does not make logical sense that shareholder-run businesses will have much sense of fairness... after all, they are only there at the top because the shareholders see competitive returns on their investment. Sole owner-businesses are more likely to be more principled because they hold all the reins and can unilaterally make altruistic decisions. That can go the other way, of course, with a business run by a tyrant, but there's no chance witrh disconnected, self-interested shareholders staring at a computer screen, looking at bottom lines. This lays it out bare, the attitude, I think. I'm sure he's not unique amongst the uber-wealthy here: He's basically saying govts have got to beat him at his game.

Trickle down /trickle up= win-win for the wealthy. Trickle down is BS. I like the idea that anybody earning 10 digits is taxed to a point below, so that 10-digit billionaires can't exist. Not very realizable in the US though.