Strange

The explanation is that if it is infinite, then it has always been infinite. (Actually, it is possible to have a model where a finite universe becomes infinite, but I don't think anyone would consider it realistic.)

The first of your diagrams is much closer to reality.

Here is a good description of how we know this (with the obvious caveat that this is science and so we never know anything for certain): http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2012/07/18/how-big-is-the-entire-universe/ I'm not sure what "how" means. If it is infinite, is is just infinite.

Sad but true.

That is why the direction of the light is changed. And a light year from the Sun there would be negligible effect on light.

The early universe was smaller than it is now. What else needs explaining?

The thing is, speed is always relative to something else (and that something else can't be "space"). So we can measure the speed of the Earth round the Sun, or the speed of the Sun round the galaxy, and the movement of our galaxy relative to others. But there is nothing that says we are moving at high speed in any absolute sense. From some points of view we are moving very fast and from others (e.g. mine) we are not moving at all.

I have seen this for several historical figures in the past. Foe example, everyone in Europe is descended from Charlemagne: http://www.itsokaytobesmart.com/post/50523412948/we-are-all-royalty-descended-from-charlemagne "Not only do all Europeans share Charlemagne as an ancestor, they share everyone alive at the same time as Charlemagne as an ancestor. Everyone who had kids, anyway." Similarly, not only would Jesus have been a descendant of King David as the Bible claims but so would everyone else around at the time. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19331938

There have been many science fiction (and, for all I know, serious) ideas for generation ships where journeys take many millennia. So I don't think that fast is the only way to go. On the other hand, such stories often focus on the problems of such a mission (breakdown of community/civilization, forgetting what the purpose was, etc.)

That is the radius of the observable universe. (So it is about 93 billion light years across.) The size of the whole universe is almost certainly many times larger than that (if not infinite).

An infinite amount. It is not possible to travel at the speed of light. And why would there be any damaging pressure? It is not really any different from travelling at a few hundred miles per hour, which people do routinely. And, as all speed is relative, you are already travelling at over 90% of the speed of light with respect to something, somewhere!

Interesting point. It's not like the paper needs to worry about violating their privacy as they have already chosen to publish their views on the Interwebz. At least in the Criado-Perez case some people were prosecuted for their behaviour.

Unbelievable. There was a similar thing in the UK when a woman campaigned to get Jane Austen put on the £10 note and, as a result, received death and rape threats on Twitter. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/10207231/Woman-who-campaigned-for-Jane-Austen-bank-note-receives-Twitter-death-threats.html But I assume these high profile cases are just the tip of the iceberg. I assume there are many women who receive threats like this for equally innocent on-line activity. (I get the impression that hypervalent_iodine has got a certain amount of abuse just for moderating the forum.)

The difference between journalism and science. For example, nothing like this bit you quote from the article appears to be in the paper: "Even at this distance, when the researchers changed the motion of one pair — stopped or started the vibrations — the other responded immediately, stopping or starting in kind." The oscillations are synchronised but they cannot be started and stopped to cause an effect on the other. A more accurate article can be found here: http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090603/full/news.2009.540.html (there is a short video on that page which explains it quite well) And here: http://www.nist.gov/pml/div688/jost_060309.cfm And the paper itself here: http://arxiv.org/abs/0901.4779

This is pretty interesting. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-35976498

Yes. Also, there is no way of knowing that something happened.

This is very obviously not true, even in those places where the laws says it should be so. And the ship hasn't even been brought back to the middle yet!

Yes. Also, there is no way of knowing that the change has occurred.

A penny saved is a penny earned. And therefore taxed.

Someone measuring the second set of particles will not (by themselves) see any difference. Imagine you have several particles and each one is entangled with a particle that your friend on the other side of the world has. Now each of you are going to measure the spins of the particles. Before you do this, neither of you know what the spin of each particle is. When you measure the first particle, you find it is spin up, for example. Now you know that when your friend makes her measurement, she will get spin down. But apart from that, nothing else changes. She will see no change at her end (because she doesn't know what the sin is yet). She won't know which particle you measured or what result you got. But as soon as she makes a measurement she will now what values you will get (or have already got). That's about it. Afterwards, you can compare notes and find that the time between your measurements was less than the time it takes light to travel between you.

It still isn't how entanglement works. All it means is that there is a correlation between the properties you measure on the two objects. Doing something to one of them doesn't have any effect on the other.

That is not how entanglement works.

I just thought you might be extolling the virtues of Switzerland to encourage more people to go there ...

There are similar payments in the UK (National Insurance). The threshold for not paying is very low, if you work more than about 21 hours a week on minimum wage you will have to pay NI. You can earn a little bit more before you have to pay tax.

So is this thread part of an official campaign to encourage migration to Switzerland?