"Can" and "Could" are two different things, especially when you're looking at the CMB. It emanates from the initial state of the universe, before the time when the laws of physics as we know them had formed.
Sure it does.
If I'm reading this then:
a) I exist b) The event happened in my recent past.
That narrows it down to within a couple of dozen years from my point of view. That makes perfect sense to me.
So you don't understand cosmological terminology, then. "Now" means that whatever we see currently, regardless of how long ago it happened (i.e., regardless of distance), is occurring now.
The Xi-sub-b is categorized as are baryon, which are formed of three quarks.
'Are' baryon... Really?
Then again, quoting further:
...the Tevatron is not a dedicated bottom quark “factpory.”
'To most people, it's a latte or two,' he added."
No, to most people it's twice the monthly fee for the same service...
As opposed to simply forgetting that pesky, "Well Regulated Militia" clause.
You understand that "Well Regulated Militia" meant (remember when this was written) a well-armed/stocked -- that's the 'regulated' part -- citizenry?
And, even if it did, where does it say that the military must be the size that it is?
I agree that it could be substantially more efficient in spending its money (the military).
Conservatives love to talk about cutting government, however they always seem to conveniently forget to include the military in those cuts. It doesn't matter that we could halve the military budget and still be spending more than any other country. If we did that, we might actually be able to pay our firefighters and we'd also have enough left over to keep Social Security solvent and pay for universal health care like every other civilized nation on earth.
Sorry to sound harsh, but you should probably brush up on the complexity and reality of geopolitics before making an erroneous statement like that. Sorry I can't expand on that... it's too complex! But seriously, I don't feel like writing a book.
Bullshit. Plain and simple. Do you think Amazon gets to avoid VAT on European sales? I think the State of California should block amazon.com from DNS resolution on state owned DNS servers, and block amazon.com's IP address at state owned routers.
Wow, really? So then all States (except CA and NJ) should therefore block NewEgg, since they don't charge taxes outside those two States?
It's like nobody gets it -- interstate commerce is not regulated by individual States; it is not an out-of-State entity's responsibility to collect sales taxes for residents of a State they have no presence in. Also, Amazon (as well as every online retailer) pays State taxes for sales to State residents (e.g., WA) that they have a presence in.
I just need enough to tide me over until I need more. -- Bill Hoest