To waterj2: Until very recent times, legislating scientific research was the norm, not the exception. I’m not talking about NSF kinds of “legislation” but as in “You, scientist. I’ll feed, clothe, and (maybe) even pay you if you solve this problem for me.” (As in, for example: “Is this the real, solid gold that I provided or has it been debased?”)
To g8rguy: Although you were merely “feeding a troll” (and, I suppose, making your post-count go bump), do you have a link to something on “inflation”? (I can, and am willing, to read–to include any math.)
To everyone else: I felt that there were several very serious aspects to the question I posed. No one else, however, seems to see anything serious in at all; just an opportunity to have fun at someone else’s expense.
"Tell us, oh great oracle, about our covetted “Big Barrooom Theory”, you say. “Give us your version of (Super)String Theory”, you say, “so that we can poke yet more fun at your ignorance.” I say as follows**:**
While you [“ustedes”] were making fun of my very earliest posts on this Board (defending F. Hoyle, who had recently died), the subject of something called “Death Stars” came up. The “BadAstronomer” commented that the fun-makers were too late; that Mimas, a moon of Saturn, was the first “Death Star”. I, in good faith, risking my psyche, asked “What is a ‘Death Star’ and what do they have to do with Saturn’s Mimas?” There was no answering post from the fun-pokers.
I, in return, have no further posts on this very serious matter (the OP) but for one comment as follows**:**
From another thread in GD, the question arose: “Would we have won had the U.S. continued WW II against the U.S.S.R. with Gen. G. Patton in charge?” Zhukov was a better tactician than Patton; the Soviet troops were much more experienced than the Allied troops; and, most importantly, Zhukov had a free hand whereas Patton was ham-strung by both the political establishment and the press.
