"Space-time smooth, not foamy," "Einstein 1, quantum physicists 0'," dead-heat photons?

Factual Questions
21

Wait a [del]minute[/del] Planck time unit. Given that this thread is side-tracked arguing about some allegedly tiny font. . . Which allegedly tiny font are we talking about?

There’s nothing tiny in the OP at least as seen on my screen. (I’m using Firefox on an older Ubuntu box.) His lengthy quote is shown in some serif font, but no smaller than normal. (And yes, tiny-size font does show up in various other posts I’ve seen and written here.)

I thought the tiny-size complaint referred to the text in the article linked in the OP, which really is tiny.

ETA: And, upon looking at the BBcodes in the OP, I see [noparse] . . . [/noparse] but nothing about any size changes. Is the whole font size discussion about something else?

22

Senegoid: Clearly you are moving at a different speed relative to the OP’s font and the other observers, thus the difference in your perception of it’s size. :smiley:

23

You’d need to have nothing on a scale smaller than billions of lightyears. Like the man-wit hybrid said: “Worst prediction ever of theoretical physics”.

24

Garamond looks smaller, when at default size, compared with this shit-ass Arial.

I even let that “justification” go, in a thread on typography and page layout.

We may not be so lucky next time. And I might use all dingbats. Which we used to call “sorts” in the Linotype shop.