Strange

Some things are. Other things are not.

That is very clear. But there is no evidence to support that claim. And it contradicts general relativity. Therefore you are making it up.

Then why do you keep disagreeing with it and making stuff up? Again, you are the one making counter-factual claims. It is up to you to support it. But... One of the first things that made Planck realise that electromagnetic radiation is quantised was the black body spectrum. This is continuous (analog, as you put it) and the equation includes Planck's constant. So Planck himself proves you wrong: [math]\displaystyle I(\nu,T) =\frac{ 2 h\nu^{3}}{c^2}\frac{1}{ e^{\frac{h\nu}{kT}}-1}[/math] What is the point of a compromise, when you are wrong.

Voltage is not quantised. It is continuous. Just because we measure it in units of volts doesn't mean you cant have a continuous range of voltages. It doesn't matter how often you repeat this, it still isn't true of all things.

Some do and (as far as we can tell) some don't. That isn't what you asked. Clearly you can't have half an electron, because they are quanta.

What, you mean like half a mile, half a millimetre or half a Planck length? All equally real.

It depends what the object is. You can have half an apple. You can have half a Planck unit.

But you can divide that number line into infinitely many pieces. Just because you can use integers doesn't mean you have to use integers.

So stop claiming that you have the answer.

By that definition, space-time is real. Why must it be discrete? Math isn't, so there is no requirement for measurements to be.

Are the spelling errors and random capitalization part of the clue? Or just random errors?

What? Know what exists? Why can't it be measured?

Because relativity requires space and time to be continuous. There is no evidence that space and time are quantized. Apart from that, pretty much everything you said was wrong.

No, he is saving me having to do it.

Well, it is misleading to think of it like an explosion. Again, the big bang happened everywhere. Perhaps the easiest way to visualise it is to "wind the clock back" so that all the galaxies get closer and closer together. Eventually they are all in the same place - so the big bang happened where every galaxy is (i.e. everywhere).

I'm not sure I would agree with that. The cat has an extent in time as well (from when it is created to when it ceases to exist).

You are contradicting yourself: there is one cat extended in time.

Or bad memory!

I would guess that if we ever get to the point that cloning makes a significant contribution to reproduction rates, that we will be facing the opposite problem, extinction.

Is there a point to these rather mangled equations?

Any direction (the big bang happened - and is still happening - everywhere). The earliest we can see is 360,000 years after the big bang when the density of the universe decreased enough to let photons travel across space. This is what we now see as the cosmic microwave background.

If your argument is based on made-up numbers, it is not going to be very convincing. Have you done a detailed analysis?

There have been several paradigm shifts just in my lifetime. I don't see any reason for that to change. But they are infrequent and unpredictable (by definition). I think the bigger problem is one of perspective and a natural bias. It is similar to the way people think that pop music was better when they were young. But they compare a few favourites from several decades, where they have forgotten all the dross, with what is happening "now".

Because they are fundamental. Currently, electrons, for example, are thought to be fundamental and are not composed of anything. That is what "fundamental" means.

OK. Maybe I take back my earlier comment. You seem to be saying that we cannot see all of space-time. We can't, for example, see the future. And we can't see things which are so far away that the light hasn't reached us yet. Nor can we see beyond event horizons. And so on. You are right. That is not metaphysical. It is just painfully obvious.