MigL

Do you have any reasoning to back up this imaginative conjecture ? Or is it just a WAG ?

I would think that if we draw a gravittional potential vs radial separation graph, we would get a curve asymptotic to the GP ( y axis ) and RS ( x axis ) of the 1/x type. Similarly, a dark energy plot on the same graph, would be a GP =CosmologicalConstant horizontal line ( y= Const ). Where the two plots cross, would be the radial separation where expansion becomes dominant and overwhelms gravity. ( disregarding any initial velocities/accelerations )

The 'model' facilitates calculations and predictions. Don't confuse the 'model' with 'reality'.

I remember 'Merchant of Venice' well. I was 'Antonio' in the stage play at my high school. Bet you didn't realize I was a Shakesperian actor ...

No, that Heisenberg ( Walter White ) cooked crystal meth. Werner Heisenberg went to Helgoland, with its sparse vegetation, because he had a bad case of 'hayfever' ( allergies ), and he used aspirin and cocaine as a remedy. He was also the head of nuclear weapon research for the NAZIS, and was close to being targeted for assassination, as a result. See here Werner Heisenberg - Wikipedia

Our local galaxy group, which includes the Milky Way and Andromeda ( M31 ), is part of the Virgo Supercluster. Another group that belongs to this Supercluster, is the M81 group, of which M81 is the brightest galaxy. Can you tell us whether the space between us and M31 is expanding ? Or rather, we are 'shrinking' with respect to that distance ? How about us and M81 ?

IIRC, W Heisenberg developed Matrix Mechanics based on spectral line emission experiments; then again, he was supposedly high on cocaine on Helgoland Island, in the North Sea. See here Matrix mechanics - Wikipedia

On the contrary, the only place we are dealing with actual physical experiments is at either end, where the observations are made; and the two observations are perfectly explainable by correlation. At any point in between we have a mathematical abstraction that says the states are undefined, until said observations are made; and that throws a wrench into the works. Where is the reality in that intervening space ? For all intents and purposes, there is no reality until those observations are made. If you want to argue that mathematical expresiions can be non-local, I could be persuaded to agree. Just as Eise's thinking can be non-local by thinking about war in the Ukraine and the Andromeda galaxy in the next instant, the probability of a coin flip showing heads is exactly the same in Ukraine as in Andromeda. Is that your definition of non-locality ? Is that what you would mean by the probabilities described by the mathematical wave function being non-local ?

I certainly haven't quoted Bell, Aspect, Einstein, et al. I'm not even sure of the timeline without researching it. I do have a problem with superluminal tranfer of information, and the definition Bangstrom has provided for 'non'locality' does just that. So that definition doesn't fly. Perhaps we are forgetting that we are dealing with models of the undelying reality, and while we can construct physical models of macroscopic processess and events, we are forever relegated to using only mathematical models of quantum processess and events. They cannot be described in terms of 'everyday', common physicality. We are, in effect, seeing something happen, mathematically, in one place, and again, in another place, at great separation, and concluding that something must be communicating between these two mathematical expressions. We are certainly not dealing with placing a weight on one end of a fulcrum and causing the other end to rise, even though that can also be explained with a ( classical ) mathematical model. We need a better understanding of what 'non-locality' means in a probabilistic mathematical model. And thanks for keeping us honest, Eise.

Personally, I have a problem with excessive nudity; it takes away the thrill of 'discovery'. In repressive Victorian times, seeing an ankle was a thrill; these days, a totally naked woman doesn't get a rise out of me. ( and it's not due to old age ) Further, I have a problem with so called 'born again' religious people, who seem to be trying to excuse their previous 'lives'. All the while passing moral judgement on pople who live their lives as they once did. ( like the anti-smoking Nazis who used to smoke three packs a day, before they quit ) And finally, I don't see what an allegorical book of parables has to do with any of this. ( are you looking for moral justification ? )

The attempt to change rules that don't make sense, or cause harm, is called 'progress', not anaarchy. Anarchy has no scales; it is the total disregard of rules. Disclaimer : Simply my opinion.

My take on this, is that expansion is due to some effect like the Cosmological Constant, an 'add-on' to the EFE, such that gravity is 'modified' by it, and the two are linked. It acts like a 'step' potential such that when gravity ( the terms other than the CC ) exceed that 'step', at close distances, gravity prevails. If gravity (terms other than the CC ) is below the 'step', at large distances,then expansion prevails.

Mostly because a valid frame of reference for a photon ( emission/ absorption ) does not exist. Much like non-locality involving superluminal communication/interaction.

Perhaps I can quote Markus, from another thread, which, although dealing with quantum gravity, seems very appropriate for quantum systems in general "I completely agree, especially since we already know that our usual paradigms don’t work for this. In particular, I suspect that any notions of smooth and regular space, time, spacetime with well-defined causal structures, and fields on spacetime will become meaningless in the realm of quantum gravity. Physics there will deal with dynamical quantities that are very different from those of ordinary classical physics, or even those of quantum physics, which will likely change the way we think about reality in very fundamental ways." Note, in particular, the bolded part. Quantum systems play 'fast and loose' with causal structures, simply because they are probabilistic.

It would burn quite a bit ( Halogenated phosphonium salt solution ), but Mr D Trump is recommending its use.

Action and reaction implies causality, which implies information transfer. Which is impossible. Correlations, OTOH, have no such limitations. Your definition is a non-starter. Maybe we need to define 'action/reaction' and 'correlation' as well, as we seem to be confusing their meanings/implications.

IF they were; alas, they are not. A quadrupole stretching/compacting effect perpendicular to the direction of travel further described here Gravitational wave - Wikipedia

That would be sweeeet ...

This runs into the same problem as "the universe is not expanding; everything in it is getting smaller". The fact is, the universe is only expanding at certain scales; below those scales, galaxies may actually be coming together, such as our galaxy and Andromeda, because the gravitational coupling exceeds the 'dark energy' of the expansion. IOW, expansion is distance ( scale ) dependent.

Sorry Studiot, commenting would be a conflict of interest. I make a product that is used to 'sterilize' the water that is used for fracking injection.

Guilty as charged, Eise. I am often confused by terminology, and while I see a definite difference between 'non-local' and 'global', their polar opposite is 'local' in both cases.

Partial mobilization only, and the protests have started. Soon he'll have more problems at home than in the Ukraine.

So, if I draw a picture where the two timelines are unequal, that will be proof that there is time dilation ??? If it wasn't so sad, I'd be laughing. One can only hope ...

Pictures and diagrams are not proofs ... Post something that makes sense, back it up with evidence, or go play in another sandbox.

Darkness does exist. Not sure about your thinking.