What if Watt Tyler has effective bodygaurds while negotiating with King Richard at Smithfield?

It's pretty clear that in his negotiations with the Royal Party, Watt Tyler lacked sufficient protection for his person. That's why he got himself severely injured, that's why the Peasant's revolt ended, at that point, with their leader severely wounded. So, let's suppose that Watt Tyler has a force of bodygaurds accompanying him in his negotiations with Richard, just like Richard has. These bodygaurds will defend him, and discourage him from open violence against the Imperial Party, himself. So, when negotiations break down, there will be no significant violence. Both sides will simply withdraw. No collapse of the Revolt, no injury to Watt Tyler, no loss of leadership in the Revolt. What happens next?

The Fraternal Order of Police School Shooters -- An Elon Musk production?

There was something rather unique about the Uvalde School Shooting, in Texas. And not just that it was the worst school shooting in Texas history. It's just that, apparently anyway, the local police were on the side of the school shooter. They assisted him by shooting some of the students themselves, and arrested parents who tried to intervene to stop the shooting, and rescue their children. So, whose side are they on, anyway? Apparently, anyway, the police were working with the school shooter, to ensure that as many children and teachers were killed as possible. Why would this be the case? Did many local police attend this particular school, and have some grudge against it? I'm going to reject this explanation as unprofessional behavior, and hence, implausible. I have another explanation. Elon Musk's Neuralink company is engaged in developing "cutting edge" approaches to dealing with mental illness and criminality. And, what could be more "cutting edge" than eliminating potential criminals before they even commit crimes? Surely, if Mr. Musk can implant microchips in people's brains to eliminate the fantasy "spectrum" of "autism", he could work with FBI profilers and genetic engineers to predict children with a high probability of becoming criminals, later in life. And, surely, if he could sacrifice unlimited numbers of human beings in failed efforts to "colonize Mars", he would be willing to work with government agencies to exterminate these children as potential criminals. Who knows, maybe this could eliminate crime completely within a few decades, given enough school shootings. So, what I'm suggesting, is that Elon may be working with the government and his Neuralink Company to build a "Fraternal Order of Police School Shooters" -- specially trained Federal Agents to work with local law enforcement in exterminating potential criminal schoolchildren in their schools, before they really become a problem. Sounds like the kind of thing that would appeal to Elon, doesn't it?

Can cell phones be used as radiation detectors?

Obviously, in order to take photographs, a cell phone has to be sensitive to light, photons, or gamma rays. However, I've read in a number of scientific articles that cell phones are also sensitive to beta rays -- electrons and positrons -- and to alpha rays -- neutrons and protons. Why is this the case, exactly? Can cell phones distinguish between the different kinds of radiation? Can cell phones determine when radiation has reached dangerous levels.

Why hasn't Elon Musk invested in controlled nuclear fusion reasearch?

I was just curious if anyone had any idea why the world's richest man, Elon Musk, hasn't invested in controlled nuclear fusion research? He hasn't at all, not a dime, as far as I'm aware anyway. This, despite the fact that he has a degree in physics, and even was briefly enrolled in a graduate program in physics at prestigious Stanford University. He even says physics is still, and has always been, his greatest interest. So, why are fellow super-billionaires Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos increasingly heavily invested in controlled nuclear fusion reasearch, but, "physicist" multi-billionaire Elon Musk, not at all? This seems kind of strange, to me, anyway. Any thoughts?

The more money we spend on Ukraine, the more we hurt ourselves

As in Vietnam, we're on the wrong side of this particular war. As with South Vietnam, we're supporting an artificially created entity, designed specifically and solely to halt or control a perceived competitor. In the case of Ukraine, Russia, in the case of South Vietnam, it was China. As with Vietnam we're spending limitless sums with little obvious result other than, perhaps, delaying the inevitable, at huge economic cost to ourselves. As with Vietnam, we're bending over backwards to demonize our opponents, really just our competitors. As with Vietnam, we're constantly seeing light at the end of the tunnel. As with Vietnam, we're constantly reassuring ourselves that our opponent is on the verge of economic collapse, when, more often than not, it's actually us! The grand old man of U.S. Diplomacy -- Henry Kissinger -- has himself said that Ukraine must give up territory if it wants this war to end, short of Ukraine's utter destruction as a nation. They cannot beat Russia, no matter how much money we spend on them. Just like Vietnam. And, Dr. Kissinger knows something about this scenario! He's seen it all before, you know.

What if the Mexican government had tried American soldiers for "war crimes" during the Mexican-American War?

The Mexican-American War, 1846-48, was the brainchild of President James Polk, and was extremely unpopular both domestically, and internationally. For decades the British government had been accusing the American government of war mongering, with some reason. You can get a feel for their attitude in Charles Dicken's novel "Martin Churzzlewit" (1843). Much of the novel is set in the U.S., and it remains one of the most brilliant satires of American society ever written. Americans are portrayed as ignorant, violent, dishonest, mercenary, war-mongering slave-holders. Essentially, American black people are portrayed as the only fully sane Americans. The Mexican-American War was a straight land grab, and, effectively, Americans could have absorbed the entire empire of Mexico, rather than just the half of it, if they'd wanted. They decided to leave the more populated southern territories of Mexico alone, as more trouble than they were worth. One of the major objections of the U.S. government to Mexico, was that they had outlawed slavery, effectively outlawing the American South's "peculiar institution". As Charles Dickens puts it in "Martin Chuzzlewit", "Americans love Lady Liberty so much, they take liberties with her!" So, let's just suppose, while America is systematically carving up Mexico between 1846 and 1848, the Mexican government decides to capitalize on anti-American sentiment in Great Britain, and hold "war crimes" trials for some captured American soldiers who had assaulted Mexican civilians for one reason or another. What effects would this have had? Presumably, these trials would have received wide attention and newspaper circulation throughout the British Empire. Would the British Empire have provided arms to the Mexican Empire, in response? Would the British Empire have intervened directly in the conflict, with ships and troops? Any thoughts?

What difference does it make if Ukraine jails a Russian soldier "for life"? Ukraine no longer exists.

Just the latest scene in the theater of the absurd we've been observing in Ukraine lately is the great play in the Western media given to the jailing of a Russian soldier for life for "war crimes". Like this is supposed to represent some major deterrent to Vladimir Putin in his military operations. Like Vladimir Putin really gives a damn, or should give a damn, what Ukrainian courts do about anything. The Russians already have thousands of Ukrainian POW's, and are on the verge of getting thousands more in what remains of Donbas, as they systematically take over the rest of the region, despite the tens of billions of dollars in useless weaponry supplied by NATO, and the brilliant support assistance of NATO mercenaries, including a goodly number of U.S. Marines. This guy who's being jailed in Kiev for "war crimes" will be drinking champagne with the best Ukrainian hookers in Moscow within six months, guaranteed! As Ukraine slowly disintegrates because of its own, and NATO's stupidity, the only issue is precisely how much territory Russia wants. Think the Mexican-American War, 1848-49. I'm quite certain the Mexicans would still like to prosecute Americans for "war crimes" from that one too, don't you think?

Are there any comprehensive lists of radioactive isotopes that emit alpha particles?

I was just curious about this information, as a means of understanding atomic processes. Possibly, such a comprehensive list of radioactive isotopes that emit alpha particles would be inconsistent with basic principles of Quantum Mechanics? The notion that energy emission of atoms can never be perfectly understood? And, perhaps, that explains why such a list is unavailable? Because basic Quantum Theory says such a list is, actually, impossible? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclides

What's the cheapest effective technology for detecting and recognizing Alpha rays?

I was wondering what the best inexpensive technology would be for detecting and recognizing alpha rays. I was thinking about looking into the properties of naturally occurring radioactive isototpes that generate alpha rays. Also, does anyone know a reasonably comprehensive list of such radioactive isotopes -- those that release alpha rays, specifically?

What's really happening in the Russo-Ukrainian War

What's really happening in the Russo-Ukrainian War is precisely what usually happens when Russia goes to war. Russia wins by slogging it out, and wearing down their opponents. Russia wins by superior discipline and centralized control. Actually, that's exactly what happened the last time the Russians and the Ukrainians fought it out, back in 1943, at Stalingrad, when the Ukrainians fought alongside their "liberators", the Nazis, against their "oppressors", the Russians. The Russians are surgically isolating and strangling their remaining objectives in the Donbas region, despite the massive airlift of NATO weapons to the Ukrainian forces. I guess those weapons aren't so great after all, are they? There's something else going on, that has been predicted in the Russian media. Poland is talking about "joint citizenship" for Polish and Ukrainian citizens. The Russians have been predicting for some time that Poland and Hungary would divide up the Western portions of the Ukraine, between them. I guess national borders aren't so inviolable after all, are they? Both the Russian and the Western media have been pumping disinformation like its going out of style, of course. That's war. What we have to face, is that nothing has really changed very much, over the years. Wars are fought for power and self-interest, and the stronger party usually wins. That's life, my friends. What's really happening is that Ukraine is being systematically split up between Poland and Russia. Get used to it. Ukraine has ceased to exist.

Alas , poor Elon!

Alas, poor Elon! I knew him well: a fellow of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy: he hath borne women on their backs a thousand times; and now, how abhorred in my imagination it is! my gorge rises at it. Here hung those lips that women have kissed I know not how oft. Where be your gibes now? your gambols? your songs? your flashes of merriment, that were wont to set the table on a roar? Not one now, to mock your own grinning? quite chap-fallen? Now get you to my lady's chamber, and tell her, let her paint an inch thick, to this favour she must come; make her laugh at that.

Is Elon Musk going down?

Tesla's lost half its value in six weeks. Elon Musk has just acknowledged having sexually assaulted a female SpaceX employee six years ago. Has Elon's luck finally run out? Certainly, Musk's had quite a run. An eccentric genius who could have been a brilliant physicist if he'd wanted to be, many consider Musk to have "changed the world" by producing and marketing electric cars and reusable rockets, and has become the world's richest man, ever, by doing so. Others would suggest that these technologies already existed, and all Musk has done is aggressively market technologies that already existed, and which are of questionable significance or actual utility. I've suggested, at times, that Elon's greatest strength, and his greatest weakness, is a peculiar personality disorder he has, related to his study and fascination with the field of physics. Physicists since the time of Isaac Newton have taken upon themselves the responsibility of understanding the entire universe, and of finding absolute laws for same. They probably can't do this, at all, however. Hence the obsession with Einstein's very questionable theory of Relativity. Physicists will actually insist, rather hysterically, that Relativity is as real as Gravity, and that anyone who doesn't think so believes that the earth is flat. Really. Physicists -- and, I think at heart, Elon Musk is a physicist -- have a personality disorder that psychologists and psychiatrists call a "God Complex". They believe that anything they say must be true, and that they can do anything they want to do. Hence Musk's insistance that he can colonize Mars, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, and his faith in his company Neuralink, although he knows nothing whatsoever about artificial intelligence, neurophysiology, or psychology. Being somehwat delusional, Elon may actually go down somewhat hard, because he really doesn't know what he's doing, at all, despite his high intelligence. His faith in himself has been infectious, of course. But, can that infectious faith in Elon's "Godlike powers" survive his unveiling as a sexual abuser, and the demonstration that Electric Cars are, in fact, just a fashion, and Tesla stock a "bubble"? How can the leader of the feminist Artemis Program, whose goal is to land women on the Moon using SpaceX technology, be a sexual abuser? Can Elon get out of this? Na Na Na Na, Na Na Na Na, Hey Hey Hey, Goodbye Na Na Na Na, Na Na Na Na, Hey Hey Hey, Goodbye

How useful are Geiger counters? -- Not as useful as personal radiation detectors

I understand geiger counters are actually quite inexpensive -- perhaps thirty dollars or so. What can they be used for exactly? Detetecting dangerous levels of radiation? Trying to understand and analyzie natural sources of radiation in the environment? I don't believe geiger counters actually break down the different kinds of radiation at all, so, I suppose that would be a kind of limitation on their utility. Personal Radiation Detectors break down the different kinds of radiation, and there are inexpensive electronic kits to make them.

NATO's war of aggression in Ukraine is a reprise of Vietnam

As Ronald Regan said, "We can sure outspend them!". Yeah, we sure can. Currently, in what NATO is describing as a war of aggression by Russia in Ukraine, NATO is outspending the Russian "aggressors" at least ten to one. This might conceivably change one's perspective slightly on who is actually the aggressor in Ukraine. For 300 years, Ukraine was a reasonably stable province of the Russian Empire, and the Soviet Union. Then, in the 1990's, just a generation ago, NATO succeeded in breaking up the Soviet Union, and Ukraine became an independant nation for the first time in centuries. Now, Russia is attempting to reclaim some of its territory, particularly in areas in which ethnic Russians are preponderant. NATO doesn't like this idea, and by outspending Russia ten to one they have, not surprisingly, been able to slow the Russian advance. However, as Senator Rand Paul is wisely stating, spending hundreds of billions of dollars a year indefinitely to try to prop up the corrupt Ukrainian regime may not really be a feasible strategy, any more than it was in Vietnam. The Afghans defeated the Russians with only modest assistance. Zelensky is demanding unlimited funding to increase his own personal wealth, and to allow Ukrainians to maintain a middle class lifestyle while they fight. Mercenaries like Zelensky and his NATO allies simply aren't a match for millions of patriotic Russians. If this continues, the Russians will still win, and the U.S. government will be bankrupt. Listen to Senator Rand Paul. This police action by the Russians is none of our business. Let's keep it that way. The Vietnam War almost destroyed the U.S. Let's quit this nonsense while we still can.

What if Albert Speer had studied physics?

Albert Speer was undoubtedly the sanest, and probably the most intelligent of all the senior members of the Nazi party. True, he was tried and convicted of war crimes at Nuremberg, but, his position as Minister of Armaments and Munitions was forced on him by Hitler himself. He couldn't possibly have refused. If Hitler had simply left him as his chief architect -- which would certainly have been Speer's preference -- Speer would never have been considered a war criminal. Even in the position of Minister of Munitions, which inevitably convicted him of war crimes, Speer managed to do some good. He saved perhaps hundreds of thousands of Jews by insisting on decent food, housing and treatment for his forced Jewish laborers. His rationale was that they worked better that way, no doubt true enough, but Speer remains a rather enigmatic and mysterious figure in terms of his actual motivations. Speer was an architect, and an excellent one, by training, but his talents were numerous. He probably could have studied physics successfully. Let's suppose that he did study physics, as well as architecture. I would suggest that this could conceivably have changed history a great deal. As one of the very few people Hitler actually liked and trusted, Speer could probably have convinced Hitler of the potential power of nuclear weapons, and, of their feasibility. Speer would also have been detached enough to see through the superficiality of much of theoretical physics. Speer would have perceived, correctly, that Einstein was possibly more of an artist than a scientist, and that Relativity theory was simply excellent science fiction. And Speer, even without physics training, was dubious about Werner Heisenberg, and his role in the Nazi A-bomb project. And Werner Heisenberg was critical in the development of Quantum Mechanics, which tells us that it is impossible to fully understand the energy emissions of atoms, thus discouraging the investigation of complex interactions between multiple radioactive isotopes, as impossible to fully understand. So, Speer steers Hitler away from the pursuit of conventional munitions, and conventional war, towards nuclear weapons, and the development of peaceful nuclear power. But, Speer goes farther. Speer studies the interactions of multiple complex radioactive isotopes in combination, something that nuclear physicists never do, because quantum mechanics tells us this is impossible to do. But, it isn't. And Speer discovers new sources of energy that are even now, currently unknown. Speer's influence with Hitler becomes ever greater, as his discoveries increase the power and prestige of Nazi Germany. Speer convinces Hitler that Jews are critical to the further development of nuclear power, so Hitler essentially drops his antisemitic policies. Albert Einstein comes back to Germany to work closely with Albert Speer. Together, Einstein and Speer develop controlled nuclear fusion reactors, providing limitless free and clean nuclear power. Einstein, Speer and Werner von Braun build spaceships powered by nuclear powered reactors that travel at speeds far greater than that of light. Einstein says, regarding his Theory of Relativity, "Well, I always said I wished someone could prove me wrong. It was never more than an idea, anyway, you know." Mankind travels peacefully to other earthlike planets, in other solar systems, colonizing them, and living peacefully together in universal brotherhood, under that beautiful, ancient Shinto symbol, the Swastika. It's a wonderful image, isn't it?

American Christian Right is seeking to repeal the 19th Amendment

The U.S. Supreme Court is moving toward repealing Roe v. Wade, and the Federal Government is moving towards a nationwide ban on abortion. The next step is outlawing the Pill, and all female based contraception. Once women cease to have any control over their own reproductive rights, they will be at the total mercy of any man, known or unknown, who happens to choose to rape them. And, this is precisely the goal of the Christian Right. In fact, the Bible really doesn't touch on abortion, at all. The words "I knew you in your mother's womb" are totally ambiguous. However, there is a very powerful idea underlying the Christian hostility to abortion. After all, what if Jesus Christ had been aborted? So much for Christianity, right? And, it goes farther than that. The central image in all of Christianity is God raping a virgin girl, and conceiving a totally new kind of being -- a man who is a God. So, by raping and enslaving women, Christian men believe that they too can become Gods. Once women lose control over their reproductive rights, they will be totally at the mercy of their "men". They will have to do whatever they are told to do. And, ultimately, that means they must lose the right to vote, or own property, at all. They will be mere chattels of men, as in the past. So, the ultimate goal of the American Christian Right is the repeal of the 19th Amendment, the right of Women to vote. Once this occurs, men can decide what, if anything, they wish to do with their women. They may be allowed to exist as "comfort women", rather along the lines of the Japanese Imperialists with their female colonials. Or, women as an entire species, may simply be exterminated, en masse. After all, with new reproductive technologies, what do we really need women for, at all? But, their is hope for women, if they have the courage to sieze it. There is a great religion that was conceived as a bastion of safety for women against oppression, with a billion or more adherents ready to fight and die for the defense of Western women against oppression -- Islam. Islamic nations have no bans on abortion. Muhammad loved women. In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries women were on their own against oppression, and had to depend on courageous suffragette heroines like Emma Goldman to fight their battles for them. But now, the forces of Islam have shown their power to fight Western Oppression. American feminists and Radical Muslims must join forces against the oppressive American State. Only then, can the survival of women be assured. This is an existential question, a question of mere survival of Women as a species. There is no choice here.

What if Hitler avoids war, and builds a sizeable thermonuclear arsenal by 1960?

While not particularly probable, I don't think this is by any means impossible, or inconceivable. For those who object that Hitler's health wouldn't have allowed him to live this long, bear in mind that in 1939 at the outbreak of WWII, Hitler was a very youthful and energetic man, looking more like forty than his actual fifty years. The stress and sleeplessness, combined with pursuit of doctors and their quack medications, that aged him thirty years in six, probably wouldn't have happened without WWII. So, if Hitler doesn't invade Poland, there's no particular reason to think he couldn't have kept his health, and stayed in power for a generation or more. And, I don't really think there was any necessity for Hitler to invade Poland, actually. True, he was deeply in debt, but, given the willingness of Europe to hand over Czechoslovakia and Austria to him, it seems likely they would have been willing to forgive these debts. Hitler could simply have developed his central European Empire in peace. Hitler showed manic-depressive tendencies his entire life, and that's, ultimately, probably what drove him to initiate WWII. Nevertheless, between the Beer Hall Putsch in 1923, and his invasion of Poland in 1939, Hitler behaved fairly rationally, and effectively. Even the Nazi-Soviet pact might have been functional, and possible, if instead of being a blueprint for aggression, it had simply been a defensive arrangement. So, suppose that instead of focusing on conventional war preparations, Hitler decides instead to focus on nuclear power, and nuclear weapons. Now, probably, it would have been a good idea not to have Werner Heisenberg -- a determined anti-Nazi -- in charge of this. Heisenberg was a genius, but, quite possibly, a greater genius at lying and manipulating than anything else. Arguably, the double game Heisenberg was playing -- failing miserably to make any progress on a Nazi bomb, while simultaneously motivating the A-bomb project in the U.S. by claiming progress -- was critical in motivating the pacifist U.S. scientists to develop the American Bomb. Without Heisenberg, they might simply have refused to work on it. Indeed, given Heisenberg's astonishing capacity for disinformation, I would suggest physicists might want to think twice about taking his theories about quantum mechanics seriously. Unfortunately, since Isaac Newton's astonishing successes some centuries ago, physicists have tended to assume that any interesting theory they choose to take under their wing must necessarily be absolutely true, regardless of evidence to the contrary, and will select evidence accordingly. Witness Quantum Mechanics, and Relativity. In any case, supppose Hitler avoids war, makes steady economic progress, and develops nuclear power and nuclear weapons after a decade or two. With no World War II, neither the U.S. nor the U.S.S.R. are going to be anything like the superpowers they became by 1945. On the other hand, the British Empire may remain a vital force. So, Hitler's Germany may actually be the world's only nuclear power by 1960, under these circumstances. Or, possibly, Germany and Britain may be the world's only nuclear powers, with Germany holding the lead in weapons and delivery systems by a considerable margin. Bear in mind, Hitler still has Werner von Braun, so, Germany is likely by 1960 to have a massive arsenal of intercontinental ballistic missiles to deliver their H-bombs and A-bombs. Now, Hitler's still Hitler. He's still the man who wrote Mein Kampf, and probably still holds these views. He's still probably an extreme antisemite, although he's so far had no opportunity to implement a "final solution" to the Jewish Problem. After all, there were only a few hundred thousand Jews left in Germany by the the time Hitler took power in 1934, so, no Holocaust, so far, anyway. Perhaps he executes some Jews from time to time, rather like Saddam Hussein used to do. But, now, he has the most powerful weapons of mass destruction to have ever existed in large numbers, with only perhaps Great Britain in a position to retaliate to any extent, at all. So, what does Hitler do, exactly, in 1960, under these circumstances?

How do radioactive isotopes affect each other?

Obviously, there are radioactive isotopes of uranium and plutonium that affect each other. That's the basis for nuclear fission, chain reactions, nuclear reactors, and nuclear explosives. What about all the other radioactive isotopes? Aren't there 900 known naturally occurring radioactive isotopes? What effects do they have on each other, if any? Is there any research on this question, available, anywhere? Surely, by definition, radioactive isotopes release energy in some form, or other. Hence, that energy could impact on other radioactive isotopes, couldn't it? And, couldn't that interaction be interesting, or useful, at times?

What if Elon Musk had never gone to college?

A significant point about Elon Musk is that not only is he very well educated -- Jeff Bezos also is extremely well educated, with degrees in compsci and electrical engineering, from Princeton -- but, perhaps more than any other top billionaire, Elon Musk actually has a very scholarly bent. He might have been just as happy, or happier, as a Nobel Prize winning physicist than as the world's richest man. And, I think that this is a factor somewhat influencing his business career. So, let's consider the influence that this orientation to the field of Physics might have had on him, and, on the world, by this stage. Suppose he never studies physics formally. What do physicists do, exactly, that might be considered somewhat different from other fields? First of all, physicists do presume to have comprehensive "laws" that model the entire universe. This wasn't always the case, but, dates from Newton's Principia (1687), which does presume to offer mathematical laws of truly universal application, and seems to work pretty well, most of the time, anyway. Since then, physicists have always presumed a similar level of omniscience regarding all of their claims. Physicists are never "wrong" about anything, they're "giants" on whose shoulders further knowledge must be built. Put simply, physicists have a God Complex, in psychoanalytical terms. While Elon Musk has claimed he has Asperger's Syndrome, since he has none of the symptoms, I don't actually think he does. What he does seem to have, as most physicists have, is a God Complex. This is consistent with the popular belief and assertion that Elon Musk has "changed the world". Since we've had liquid fueled rockets and electric cars for generations before Musk was even born, I'm not really sure that he has. This is also consistent with his consistent claim to be able to colonize Mars. Something, with all his money, he can't possibly do, with anything remotely resembling the technologies he has developed, or is developing. Actually, both Jeff Bezos, with Amazon, and Bill Gates, with Windows, probably have changed the world quite a bit more than Elon Musk is ever likely to do. So arguably, Musk's physics training has made him somewhat grandiose and delusional, as physicists tend to be. Possibly, he might have done more useful and important things, if he'd never studied physics at all, and hadn't gone to college. On the other hand, I think it is significant that Elon Musk has quite consistently avoided all business activity related to nuclear power, in any form at all. Both Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos are becoming progressively more heavily invested in fusion power research, while Elon Musk has consistently rejected all aspects of it. I think, at least in terms of all conventional approaches, Musk is actually quite right about this, and Gates and Bezos are quite wrong. None of the current approaches to nuclear fusion seem to be much more than make-work projects for physicists and engineers. They don't work, and can't work. Not very well, anyway. And, Musk has the training and analytical skills to see this. So, if Musk hadn't studied Physics at college, he might be sucked into the bottomless vortex of funding useless nuclear fusion projects, just like his super-billionaire colleagues have been.

Could COVID vaccines facilitate the spread of mutations by biological evolutionary processes?

Darwin teaches us of the "survival of the fittest". COVID vaccines kill off standard COVID variants in a narrow spectrum, I believe, much narrower than would be the case for natural immunity. Thus, could COVID vaccines facilitate the spread of non-standard COVID mutations by killing off their competition, and, making these mutations the "fittest"? With all the standard forms of the virus eliminated, the mutations would have all biological resources -- that is, human victims -- at their exclusive disposal. Surely, this would make them more likely to survive, wouldn't it?