Yeah, I figure it's going to be something like that. Whatever the details are (whether they have to activate it or it happens automatically every week or two, whether it was an accident or sabotage, etc) I think that has to be the general outline.

"Hormonal birth control screws with this. A woman who finds a man attractive when she is on the Pill may find him inexplicably less so when she is off it, say when they're trying to conceive or she switches to an IUD after having kids."

If I recall correctly, and as you probably know, the first major evidence that Newtonian gravity was incomplete was the anomalous precession of Mercury, observed in the mid-19th century.

1. Boltzmann Brains are, most generally, used as a something of a "thought experiment," an illustration of various problems in counting over infinite sets, i.e. the measure problem, specifically how does one meaningfully count observers when all quantities are infinitely large. Indeed, many discussions involving…

[Sorry about the wall of text - there should be paragraph breaks but the comment system is acting up, unless it's just the way it's displaying to me.]

The Earth-Moon L2 point is some 60,000 km beyond the Moon. If you're in an L2 halo orbit, the Moon is not both sufficiently large and sufficiently close to completely eclipse the Earth, and you would have a continuous view of the Earth over the limb of the Moon.

The Earth-Moon L2 point is some 60,000 km beyond the Moon, so if you're in an L2 halo orbit, the Moon is not both sufficiently large and sufficiently close to completely obscure your view.

"I believe most models of the universe consider it to be finite but unbounded."

As far as I know, the most favored cosmological models assume that the universe is spatially infinite. (The observable universe, of course, being finite.)

"So when the brain looked around, it might be in a orderly little corner itself, but when the rest of the universe would most likely be a mess. The universe we can see is strange, sure, but it's as orderly as our corner, right out to the edges."

"I think that The Ring is actually slightly scarier than Ringu, actually."

Yes, that's true isn't it? I approve! I didn't really mind Wolverine as a standalone film, but it certainly wasn't anything special - on the other hand I thought X Men 3 was very poor. So if First Class acknowledges only 1 and 2, that's fine by me!

Playing Devil's Advocate for a moment, here....

You'd get eclipses. Depends on the orbit.

Assuming chemical rockets with an exhaust velocity of 4400m/s (shuttle engines), an ISS dry mass of 450 tons, and delta V to L2 of about 3.4km/s, I get the fuel required to be a bit over 500 tons. That's a lot of launches and a lot of on-orbit cryogenic storage, so it's not really practical.

It actually requires less delta V to get to L2 than L1.

This is talking about a spacecraft in orbit at the Earth-Moon L2 point - not on the lunar surface.

The Ring (the Gore Verbinski remake of Ringu) is one of a bare handful of films that has ever actually scared me.

I thought the more recent Star Wars movies were extremely poor films, but I don't think that was due to the actors.

I looked him up on IMDB to see if I'd enjoyed any of his roles, and was surprised to discover he played the Paper Boy in "In the Mouth of Madness" - I think that's the best thing I've seen him in.