MigL

Except that NATO is, and has always been, a defensive organization of member states, against aggression by any other state ( not just Russia or the USSR ), exactly as Russia is doing right now. Hence, the results of many other countries, including the Ukraine, wanting to join NATO for the purpose of preventing such criminal aggression. Does it seem to you like things are working out for Russia, and V Putin's 'point of view' ?

With 60 % they can make 'dirty' bombs, as 60 % is not fissile, as opposed to fissionable ( requiring high energy neutron bombardment ). 60 to 80 % ( minimum required for fissilability ) is the difficult part. See here Why It's So Hard to Make Nuclear Weapons | Live Science

Some people ( Peterkin ) don't seem to realize that 99 % of laws are morality based and implemented by lawmakers/politicians. ( although the better laws are implemented with input from 'experts' ) Well, thats that, then. Might as well declare the US a failed state. ( at least in Peterkin's opinion )

Iran's leaders should be careful. Russia and North Korea enjoy a certain amount of 'freedom' to act as renegade states because they have nuclear weapons. Iran has no such leverage.

Balanced approach ??? We should equally criticise, or praise, Russia as we do the Ukrainians ? We should criticise, or praise, the aggressors/invaders as we do the sovereign country that has been invaded ? We should equally criticise, or praise the criminals as we do the victims ? Is that what passess for 'balance' in your mind ? Give your head a shake. ( do you hear that rattling noise ? something may be loose in there )

Raytheon just successfully tested their hypersonic missile. I imagine that within 6 months The US will have considerably more of them than Russia has. ( and if hostilities are still ongoing, maybe the US should send a few to the Ukraine )

Manchin is to Democrats what Collins is to Republicans. And they seem to work well together. ( see the new elections bill )

Peterkin and others are constantly complaining about Republicans redrawing voting districts, and changing rules in an effort to keep minorities from voting. And rightly so; this is obviously an attack on democracy, as evidenced by the fact that they still win elections even though more people voted or their opponent. What then should we make of the situation in North Carolina ? NC Green Party rejection sparks claims of unfair undermining by national Democrats | WFAE 90.7 - Charlotte's NPR News Source https://youtu.be/omwJ4b3uNOc https://youtu.be/mQWrJV1q0KU Seems the Democrats have jumped in the mud with the pigs. Now you could make the argument that Republicans have done much worse, but that would be 'whataboutism'. Or you could argue that Green votes will take votes away from Democrats and their effort to defeat Republicans, but that flies against democratic principles. Do we need to pinch our noses when casting ballots because of the stench ? Is there no party with integrity left ? ( politics section seems kind of slow; thought I'd release the brake, and get it moving )

Maybe it's a language issue, but, of the three so called 'undamental' choices you present, only one is actually fundamental. Speed is a change in distance per period of TIME. Change is the diference in something over a period of TIME. TIME is the only fundamental variable, of the choices you presented. Maybe try again when you are less tired ....

How do you assess whether a change is instantaneous or happens over a period of time, without a separate, independant notion of 'time' ?

A Kerr ( rotating ) BH also has two event horizons. See here Rotating black hole - Wikipedia As with Reissner-Nordstrum ( charged ) or Kerr-Newman ( rotating and charged ), certain values of spin ( angular momentum ), if exceeded, will cause the inner horizon to move outside the outer horizon, leaving a 'naked' singularity. That is what I have read; my math is not advanced enough to 'interpret' the Kerr metric that way. Naked singularities are even more absurd and non-sensical than plain singularities, which must always be hidden by an event horizon. For the reasons presented by Halc above, charged BHs would be extremely rare, if possible, as they tend to 'neutralize' themselves, and a Schwarzschild ( non-rotating ) BH is almost impossible, as collapse increases even the smallest amount of spin ( 'ice skater drawing in her arms' effect ). The most viable solution for almost all BHs, is the Kerr metric or a rotating BH.

Speaking of J Depp ... It definitely seems like he has some substance abuse/anger management issues along with a sense of being 'better' than others. Johnny Depp settles assault lawsuit filed by ‘City of Lies’ crew member (msn.com) Maybe A Heard should have asked G Brooks, the location manager who brought the lawsuit, to testify at her defamation trial.

Might give us an idea how common planets are in our galaxy, and how many are 'earth-like'. It has been suggested that 'rocky' planets, if not 'earth-like' planets, outnumber the stars. If so, we might have an actual number to plug into one term of the Drake Equation, and get a step closer to resolving the Fermi Paradox.

Very self-centered questions. We are not the only life on this planet. The only difference between humans and other life, is that we are more self-aware, and call this effect conciousness ( or a soul, if religious ). This ties in to the second question, as we think we are 'special'; it is simply hubris, we are not special. Otherwise, the purpose of life is to reproduce and die. The only objective reality we have, is what science can measure; everything else is subjective.

Thanks Swansont. The Eddington limit is one other such factor, which I didn't remember.

MOND can be modelled in two ways ... As a modification of Newton's second, where the a in F=Ma is modified. Or the inverse square relation ( 1/r2 ) is modified in Newonian gravity. See here ... Modified Newtonian dynamics - Wikipedia The Wiki article, should you choose to read it, explains some insurmountable problems with MOND and TeVeS, its relativistic formulation, such as the problem with the observations of the Bullet Cluster collision of 2006 which suggests that Modified Newtonian Dynamics is not enough to account for those observations, and that some form of 'dark' matter is still required.

If stars were composed of purely Hydrogen then all stars would be the same size, and limited only by availability of the gas. You could have small, unburning Jupiters, but at a certain mass, all H2 composed stars will start burning ( fusion ). Adding heavier elements to the mix, like Helium, will delay the onset of fusion and allow the star to become larger because Helium will sink to the core and burning starts at much higher temperatures/pressures. Carbon and other heavier cores will start even later. That is the reason our Sun will swell to a red giant in its old age; the build up of 'heavy' elements at its core. Genady mentioned metallicity, the amounts of even heavier elements present in second generation stars, which may act as moderators in the fusion process, and keep it from starting early. These factors, and probably others I haven't thought of, all play a role in the onset of fusion, which then blows the rest of the gas away.

A simple, non-rotating, non-charged Schwarzschild BH has the concept of mass encoded in the size of the EH; increase the mass ( by injesting material ) and the size ( radius ) of the EH increases. The EH is a mathematical construct, not a massive object like a brick wall. Rotating BHs ( Kerr ) and charged BHs ( Reissner-Nordstrom ) ecode angular momentum and charge in differently configured ( multiple ) EHs.

The classically conserved quantity we associate with 'mass' is essentially encoded in the event horizon. As such it is a measure of the local space-time curvature. For all we know ( classically ) there is nothing inside a BH. Gravitational waves are only observable outside the event horizon, and any 'internal', if possible, would simply contribute to energy-momentum of the system, due to self interaction.

Altering the configuration of a system will change its energy-momentum, resulting in a change in the local space-time 'curvature', and possible gravitational wave emission ? Is that not a causal relation ?

To paraphrase the Merovingian ( in the Matrix ) ... "Cause and effect, my dear" Energy-momentum is the 'cause'; space-time curvature is the resulting 'effect'. This is true for any gravitating body, not just Black Holes. The difference is the causal disconnect of the space-time within the event horizon, and outside the event horizon.

You're in 'good' company.

Any change in the arth's orbit, even a doubling of the orbital radius, would have minimal effect on the surface gravity of the Earth. The changes in climate, however would be catastrophic for life. And the mechanism for increasing the orbital radius, whether by impact or other means, would be even more catastrophic. Have you heard of Occam's razor or the KISS principle ?

You should be wrapping your head in aluminum foil ... You are going to great lengths to villify Ukrainians, and excuse the aggression that Russia has perpetrated on another sovereign country, with the feeble excuse that they are 'de-NAZIfying' the Ukraine. How many people need to die for the aggrandizement of one insecure person ? An you want to blame the victims in this ? I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt by assuming you're a foil-hat wearing conspiracy theorist, and not just anothe V Putin 'ball-licker'.

I know the Kerr metric predicts a 'ring' singularity, but as far as 'passages' to other universes, I believe that's due to the possible connections of Penrose diagrams. Whether those connections represent possible realities is a different story, which I will not speculate on.