Well, who's a tetchy Anonymous Coward then?

Except for when we find out that we're living in a simulation - then the model is reality.

String theories may not be currently testable but they are in principle testable although we may never have the access to the levels of energy required to really probe the structures at Planck levels. It's always possible that someone will find clever ways of testing the theories in the future. Some of the predictions of relativity have only recently been actually tested, so we don't necessarily need perform the experiments for a theory to be useful.

A few of your peers in the comics industry are heavily into Magick (not the card game) and the occult. Are you similarly interested in the occult beyond using it as a plot device (e.g. Gravel)?

You obviously have an interest in the boundary of society and technology, so if cybernetic implants became common, what would be your favourite upgrade and why?

Have you read or been heavily influenced by Philip K Dick? Some of your work does use a lot layered realities (I'm thinking especially of Gun Machine and Supreme: Blue Rose) which is one of his trademarks.

That might work if we knew that the Earth was perfectly spherical and uniformly dense. However, it's going to be almost impossible to keep track of all the differences in velocity and gravity at different points on the earth in order to compare the measurement of time at one clock with the measurement of time at another clock. The clocks would be correctly measuring time, they'd just never agree with one another due to their frame of reference being different.

You're problem is thinking of time as absolute. "Now" travels at the speed of light, so depending on your frame of reference and distance from the event, your "now" would be different to someone travelling at a different velocity and it's quite possible that you'd disagree about the order of events happening.

In the larger universe, it's more obvious that there is no single frame of reference to which you can pin "simultaneity". "Same time" only makes sense in a single frame of refernce.

It's always possible that there'll be a new paradigm that helps explain why nature behaves like it does, but quantum mechanics is so astoundingly accurate that it's pretty much certain that nature really is quantum mechanical (along with all the non-intuitive "weirdness" that entails).

There's several experiments that can be done (e.g. Young's Two-Slit, or explaining how a diffraction grating can reflect light) that very clearly demonstrate that reality is behaving in a quantum mechanical way and the results are impossible to explain in a classical manner.

I also thought they were talking about coupling two pairs of photons. I understand what you're saying, but you'd expect there to be a difference between saying "coupling photons" or "coupling photon pairs". I think "coupling photons" would have been clearer.

Well I live in England, where we don't get extreme weather, so I feel justified in saying that to anyone I meet in the UK.

However, with the right clothing, people have survived all kinds of strange conditions (even underwater), so I reckon you just haven't found the right clothing for your frozen mix. (A full scuba drysuit is almost like a climate-controlled building, so you might be right about that).

Exactly. There's no such thing as bad weather, just the wrong clothes.

I don't mind the cold on my bike, but I don't like lots of rain as my road bike doesn't brake well in the wet and I have to go a lot slower which takes the fun out of it. Snow is good fun with the right set of tyres, but we don't get a lot of snow here in England.

Sustaining 20mph isn't that hard. It takes a certain amount of fitness, but I'm 45 and can manage it on the flat easily enough as long as there isn't a headwind. Over a normal route with some hills, I typically maintain an average of around 17mph for over an hour, but I know amateurs who are way quicker than I am. I do a lot of cycling, but I'm certainly no "elite" racing cyclist.

You may be right, but does it really matter what the reason is? As long as the medics get to where they're needed then I don't see that ulterior motives should be our main concern.

How about fingerprints being unique? That's generally believed with no scientific evidence to back it up.