Yeah, I'm realizing I have two contradicting notions in my head about that now. Is there still some sort of mapping being done, by any other name than CMB though? That thing we were all excited for a peak of about how the universe X billion years ago was shaped?

This applies to nearly all insects too. When an insect is unable to molt any more, then it usually means it’ll die soon since they can only really regenerate their organs when they molt. It’s why arachnids and crustaceans can live so much longer than most insects, because they can keep molting and hence rejuvenate themselves.

When insects injure their exoskeleton, the most they can do is exude a patchwork fix. When spiders and crustaceans lose an entire leg, they can regenerate it after a molt or two. The most primitive insects like silverfish have no metamorphosis and can keep molting as well.

It’s telling that the longest lived insects, termite queens, are protected by an entire colony and do not need to move around, minimizing the damage they sustain.

The new blood test is an old test that has been used for environmental monitoring, but not human blood. The neat part of the study was separating the plastics from the blood.

There is no useful measurement for microplastics inside the human body.

For instance, they are mostly inside your gut and lungs. Currently, to measure microplastic exposure involves taking your poop dissolving it and separating out the tiny pieces of plastic from all the food stuff. Not easy to do, but also not very useful information.

We think you have about 100,000 plastic microparticles enter your body everyday. The plastic particles are only about 4% of all the total microparticles per day you are exposed to, the rest mostly being "natural" particles of things like fine sand, dirt, biological materials etc.

When you die, we think about only 1000 will be inside your body. That is from autopsies, so not a lot of information but even order of magnitude it is <<< than your daily microparticle intake. They may be stuck in lesions in your lungs or little blister-things in your gut. Maybe some have crossed the gut to get stuck in some organs. But vast 99.999+% just pass through you like ghosts through a wall.

Everything else - we don't know. We don't know if they are neutral guests along for a ride and doing nothing, if they do anything "good" or anything "bad", if they are correlated with anything. That's an important question: the old prove it doesn't hurt me versus prove it is safe. There are lots of natural things we haven't proved are safe, but we also haven't found anything harmful either.

The conclusion of the linked article is keen to point out that they don't know if the particles are floating in your blood or carried inside cells. They don't know the fate of the particles. They have no way to link blood numbers to any sort of health outcomes or even to ongoing monitoring.

> What I'm asking is whether or not it is possible that there is a form of energy so far undiscovered [...] that can travel faster than light.

That is possible, but it looks very unlikely. And it's not related to entanglement.

> that registers at a quark or subquark level

That part doesn't make sense.

> Light is the current known standard by which to measure speed, but photons are comprised of "bundles" in the electromagnetic field being transferred super fast from one point in the field to another point in the field.

No, the speed of causality is a far more fundamental concept. Light travels at that speed, and we call it "speed of light" for historical reasons, but the speed limit is much more general than light.

> "The field" itself is what I would like to know more about and understand its role in energy transfer.

The electromagnetic field? That's again not a question about entanglement.

> Quarks are theoretical and considered so bc there isnt concrete physical evidence for them

Are you commenting from the 1950s? That's a time where such a statement would have been reasonable. We have studied quarks routinely for decades now.

> its entirely possible that there are even smaller units than quarks that are undetectable due to limits in current technology.

That's unlikely but we cannot fully rule it out. But again, this has nothing to do with anything else in your comment.

There are no "absolute positions" anyway.

Yes. Your body will replace the fuel stores, but to do that water needs to go in with it.

Ok that makes a lot of sense. So, if you worked out hard enough, the muscles need more water than before, to maintain that balance, if I read you right.

[removed]

Water increases in proportion to muscle creatine phosphate and glycogen content. Both fuels are used up during exercise, and the water leaves the cell. As your body replaces the fuels you depleted, water goes in with it to maintain the osmotic balance. Plus there are probably hundreds of other cellular processes activated that require water in some capacity.

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

What I'm asking is whether or not it is possible that there is a form of energy so far undiscovered that registers at a quark or subquark level that can travel faster than light.

Light is the current known standard by which to measure speed, but photons are comprised of "bundles" in the electromagnetic field being transferred super fast from one point in the field to another point in the field.

"The field" itself is what I would like to know more about and understand its role in energy transfer.

Quarks are theoretical and considered so bc there isnt concrete physical evidence for them, but if thats the case, its entirely possible that there are even smaller units than quarks that are undetectable due to limits in current technology.

Maybe more accurate to say that the standard model is just QED with more fields. But basically, yeah. QCD for example, involves the strong nuclear force (gluons) and "particles" with "color" (eg. quarks). QED is electromagnetic force (photons) and "particles" with charge. Vanilla QED just considered electrons (and by extension, positrons).

This is wrong, if as you claim the global economy is about to become regional, then third world countries with their large amounts of self-sufficient subsistence populations are the best placed to ride it out. Also the net drain of resources from Africa to Europe and American would stop, which would be a further boost

It's like trying to reach last Monday. In which direction would you walk? Similarly, avoiding the singularity is as impossible as trying to avoid reaching the next Sunday.

The speed of light as speed limit for information transfer has nothing to do with the size of particles. You cannot transfer information faster than light, no matter which particles you use and no matter which particles exist, entanglement doesn't change that.

He is a crackpot.

> Is it theoretically possible?

No.

It has some connection to real physics. Some parts are made up for the story, but you can clearly see that the writers listened to physicists in many places.

What do you mean by prove supersymmetry? There are searches at the lhc. See for example https://atlas.web.cern.ch/Atlas/GROUPS/PHYSICS/PUBNOTES/ATL-PHYS-PUB-2023-005/ for the searches at ATLAS. There is a similar set of plots from CMS

A neodymium magnet won't produce a field stronger than 1-2 T. We have MRI machines that are significantly stronger than that, and they don't kill their patients.

The amount of light that gets deflected by more than a tiny fraction of a degree is negligible, and a measurable deflection needs the lensing of other galaxies and good telescopes to notice it at all. All the stars you see with the naked eye are where you see them.

Yes and no. There is a lot of real physics. They had physicists check on it. I had colleagues who had their research either talked about or on chalkboards / whiteboards. But things are also no real physics but parodies of it. Like super asymmetry.

More particles and more interactions - QED is only electromagnetism, which is the easiest interaction to work with. The strong and weak interaction are more complicated, and then you also have to add the Higgs mechanism.

There is now evidence that Neanderthals went extinct after a major volcanic eruption from which they couldn't shelter.