MigL

JC and I shouldn't comment any further... Canada is technically at war with Denmark over Hans Island, which straddles the boundaries between Greenland and Canada. Hostilities are on-going. The Danes plant their flag on the island, and leave a bottle of Shnapps. The Canadians plant our flag and leave a bottle of Canadian Club ( rye whiskey ). No casualties yet.

Greenland has been moving towards independence . And both Russia and China have increased their Arctic 'presence'. This may just be a way to check their moves in the area. I wonder... If D Trump does buy Greenland, will the Danes pay for it ? ( like Mexico and the wall )

I assume you mean Bekenstein bound or limit, Mordred. Jacob Bekenstein, of Bekenstein-Hawking Black Hole entropy fame.

String theory is an attempt at modelling our reality as per the scientific method, and is subject to all the constraints of said method. In simulation, however, our reality IS the model in someone else's reality. IOW you could call simulation a theory in that other reality, but not in ours. We ( and our reality ) would simply be the model. IE not the same thing at all.

Space-time is geometry. We know that at sufficiently small scales ( Planck ), geometry ceases to have meaning. Until we can be sure of the 'size' of the seed from which our universe sprang, we can't be sure if space-time is a meaningful concept that can be applied ( in that primordial era ).

Sorry, I keep mis-typing the number... The relic radiation of the CMB is from approx. 300 thou yrs after the BB event. ( could not edit previous post )

The Big Bang didn't originate at a 'center' or any specific location. It originated EVERYWHERE. ( once you come to grips with this, you understand more cosmology than 99 % of the population ) Further, properties like momentum, energy, velocity, etc. are all frame dependant; and anytime you specify one of these quantities, you need to specify "relative to what". ( that's where the term Relativity comes from ) As you seem to have difficulty with the definition of a FoR, I suggest a google search for some clarification. That being said, the closest thing to a 'universal' reference frame ( I stress, no such thing exists ), is the CMB. This is the left-over glow from when matter in the universe consisted of opaque, decoupled plasma, approximately 300 mil yrs after the Big Bang event. I cannot say the 'observable' universe, as that has changed over the past 13.4 bil yrs. Our galaxy's direction of motion, and speed, relative to this 2.7 deg 'glow', can be calculated from the amount of 'blue' shift ( of the CMB glow ) in the direction of travel. But you must understand that this is NOT a real 'universal' frame. ( that is impossible for mathematical reasons )

You guys are not talking about the same thing. Sure, a universal health care system is something to strive for; most other countries ( Canada and Europeans ) already have some form of it. It has a few problems but none of us would trade it away. Free education is also something to strive for, as it is an investment in the future. I'm not sure about European countries, but Canada already subsidizes a large part of post secondary education. It might not happen in my lifetime but I can see the day that we'll have free education in Canada. Other suggested left policy is also desirable. Things like UBI and real pensions, reparations for groups that have been, and still are, disadvantaged in the past, so that everyone has equal opportunity ( NOT equal outcome, that is a personal responsibility ). And a lot of these things could be election platforms in places like Canada or Europe, and I wouldn't be a bit surprised if we voted to at least attempt them. But this is a US election we are talking about. You remember the push-back B Obama got with his health care proposal ? And not just from the Republican party, but from regular citizens ( even some who leaned Democrat ). It was push-back from American people and disenfranchisement with a government which didn't listen to them, that got an idiot like D Trump elected President. Some in the Democratic party ( and some members of this forum ) think that its a good idea to push even harder for policies like health care, free education, UBI and reparations. I foresee increased push-back from the American people and anger at an aloof government who isn't addressing their ( perceived ) needs. ...and another 4 years of D Trump. Myself, I would be happy with a presidential candidate who has some experience with foreign policy and trade, and who will restore the reputation of the US around the world. One who promised to modify or replace the current mess of a health care system with a truly universal one. One who, in his next term, or a few years down the road, might even start looking at subsidized education. But most importantly, one who isn't DONALD TRUMP. ( don't hand him the election by going too left, too quickly )

How long do you think the pension system would last ?

There's crazy, and then there's CRAZY, Dimreepr.

What are your options ? Destroy the institution of US Presidency because this one happens to be a jerk ? There have been plenty of jerks in recent history who led countries we went to war against ( A Hitler and B Mussolini ), while others were tolerated ( J Stalin, V Putin, and most of the Russian leaders from the 50s to the 80s, Mao Zedong and subsequent Chinese leaders, including present day Hong Kong, the North Korean Kim dynasty, Canbodia's Pol Pot, Turkey's Recep Erdogan, and quite a few South/Central American dictators ). If you don't tolerate these leaders, what do you suggest doing about it ?

I believe people are allowed to believe whatever they want, even if discriminatory. Acting on those beliefs is different, and against the law. Inciting violence against others certainly is. There are as many opinions as there are people on this world. If everyone was offended by everyone else's opinions, there wouldn't be much discussion. Then how would I pass the time at work ?

Don't feel bad. I still do.

"Boris, recognized by a trademark mop of unruly blonde hair and a bumbling, gaffe-prone speaking style" Don't know much about the man ( other than he wants England out of the EU although being the son of an EU civil servant ), but the above quote makes him sound like your version of D Trump. Join the club.

Violence is a totally different subject, and no-one should be expected to tolerate it. But if we are talking ideas and views people may have, I would tolerate anyone's OPINION, but will certainly not tolerate wrong FACTS. ( though sometimes, people's ideas/views can be considered emotional violence )