I didn't read the article, but I decided that what it says is that people get half of their liver removed at 20 and it gets put on ice. Then, at 40 or 50, they have their destroyed liver removed and the half that they had removed at 20 put back in.

Wow. The only one I find truly surprising is the married affair. I wonder if there is a divide between:

"I think my having an affair while married is morally acceptable."

Vs

"I think my spouse having a married affair is morally acceptable."

Vs

"I think others that are not me or my spouse having married affairs is morally acceptable."

I suspect that there is a lot of, "My married affair is the only morally acceptable one because I have good reasons for it while others are just cheaters."

Haha, nice. Don't forget the shiny rocks.

We know how fast genetic changes occur. If we look at all mitochondrial dna and count the number of genetic differences between all we have cataloged, we can follow backwards to they would all effectively be the same. Depending on fastest estimates and slowest estimates of genetic drift, it's roughly 150k-170k years ago.

And basically this means that we only know of one female at that point. We can see nobody else beyond her because we have no mitochondria that show genetic differences that come out older than that. Either they all died out, or they were bred out of the population.

Who has newspapers or magazines anymore?

I don't have a good answer for you. I'm not actually a space guru. I've picked up a lot of stuff over the years and I general know what I'm talking about, but I don't have the deep knowledge that was required to figure this stuff out in the first place.

What I can say is that we can calculate a lot more than we can observe. So, logically, you are right. But I honestly have no idea of we can calculate the size we think it is. I also can say that, even if we could calculate it, it's effectively a meaningless value because we could never verify it.

You are always in the middle of the observable universe.

That is technically correct. There's a YouTube video about it by... minutephysics, I think, that points it out. But practically speaking, if you said you wanted to travel across the 93 billion light year universe at the speed of light, ignoring other aspects of special relativity, it would take far longer than 93 billion years.

You are not measuring it directly you are observing certain things, like the rate that other galaxies are moving away from us, and using the red shift observed to calculate the speed is moving away, and then you extrapolate based on how far away things are from us that they must be moving away that much faster.

No. That isn't what that means. If you can't see beyond the horizon, it doesn't mean a new world starts at the horizon, the world just continues. If you can't see stars beyond this galaxy, it doesn't mean another galaxy would have to start where we can no longer see. The observable universe is just the region of space that light had had enough time to reach us in, it doesn't mean that is the edge of reality.

Nope. I've never heard anything about the speed of light changing. If it did, it would cause all sorts of havoc with the science.

The universe is expanding. No two nearby points are expanding faster than the speed of light, but when you look at two distant points, the combined expansion been them is overall faster than the speed of light.

We can't see the "edge" of the universe. So we have no idea. We don't even know if there is an edge.

Pretend the universe is a balloon. While it's deflated, using a marker, draw two dots on the balloon an inch apart. Now blow the balloon up. As you blow, the balloon is expanding. The two dots will get further and further apart. And yet they haven't actually moved.

Is there really an edge to the balloon? It's hard to say. In a way, the balloon is a two dimensional surface with no clear edge. But only when you look at it in 3 dimensions can you say there is an inside, an outside, and the balloon itself.

Well if the universe is a 3 dimensional balloon, there might not be an edge on 3D space, but if you were to look at the universe in 4D, there might be an inside, an outside, and the universe itself.

It's... complicated. I'm not sure I fully understand myself so trying to explain it to another person is probably beyond me. But I'll see what I can tell you.

First, light doesn't change in speed, it changes in wavelength when emitted from something moving relative to you (away from you or towards you). It's kind of like the doppler effect where a sound moving towards you will have one pitch, but when it passes you and starts moving away, the pitch changes. Light is kind of the same.

So light emitted from a source moving towards you turns blue and light emitted from a source moving away from you turns red. The faster the thing is moving towards you or away from you, the more the color of the light changes in that direction.

When we look out much beyond our galaxy, everything we see is red, so everything is moving away from us. We can see the things that are furthest away are redder than the things that are near so the furthest stuff is moving away faster than the closest stuff. And by measuring this "red shift" in color, we can calculate how fast these things are moving away. And by reversing that speed, we can calculate how long it had been since those things were where we are now.

Now I'm not sure if this is exactly how it's done, but logically if you calculate how long it had been since literally everything was all in one spot, that can tell you the age of the universe.

Does that make sense? Kind of like one of those old words problems. A train is moving away from you at 60 mph. It is 45 miles away from you now. How long has it been since the train was at your location?

There are several problems with your statement.

First, 46 billion light years is referencing the size of the OBSERVABLE universe. Not the size of the entire universe.

Second, it's 46.5 billion light years in radius. So that's 93 billion light years across.

Third, the universe is constantly expanding. The universe is 13.5 billion years old and yet 46.5 billion light years of light has reached us. So in the 93 billion light years you spent trying to cross the currently observable universe, it would expand to 300 billion light years or more. In other words, the observable universe is expanding faster than light speed and you would basically never reach the other side traveling at light speed.

Yes, this and the difference in the amount of matter and antimatter was just the tiniest fraction of a percent, but that tiny fraction difference is enough to leave behind all the matter that exists in the universe.