Nice try.

… and ask yourself: how were these problems eventually resolved?

‘Convincingly’? If you say so. There are lots of unresolved problems: quantum gravity, origin of life, aspects of big bang cosmology… what arguments can I advance that science will eventually resolve these? Call it faith if you wish, but also look back to the ‘hard problems’ of 100 or 200 years ago…

Well, that’s not wrong and, in my view, not mocking either.

This is not a problem, and being critical is not ‘mocking’. If you believe scientists and philosophers should be prevented from critical analysis because they can’t ’come up with something better’ then I’d recommend a couple of books on the history and science and philosophy.

In the olden days when I was an academic researcher, the practice was to list authors alphabetically. Not sure if this is still the norm today. We would discuss changing our names to Aaron A. Aadvark.

Definitely, but the arguments changed when astronomers figured out how to measure the distances to stars and galaxies, which is where this history begins.

Carlo is a theorist with an extraordinary ability to write about physics with a rather poetic style. Though theoretically possible, there is no evidence for white holes. He also believes time isn’t real. I’m a big fan.

I’m really sorry to have to tell you this. But you’ll be long dead. And there will be nobody left to remember you. Or me.

Think Slough on a Monday night.

I doubt it, but who can tell? The expansion of the universe is accelerating, and if this continues everything in it will become stretched beyond the horizon from which any light can get back. It will go very cold and very dark. Anything left will reduce to a state of maximum entropy.

I think the universe will more likely die a heat death. A long time from now.

Well, it seems obvious that the sun will rise tomorrow. But …

🤣