What a great game. It made me imagine what it would be like to travel such a wonderfully large universe.

Did the SA article come out before or after the article above? Because the JWST has been creating problems for lambda CDM. Take, for example, this Quanta Magazine article. The purport of the article is that, even though the data from the JWST seems to contradict ΛCDM, it really doesn’t, if we just apply post-hoc modifications.

Why are the galaxies so bright at very high red shifts? Oh, the initial mass function was higher. Or it was super efficient star formation. Or the density of dark matter was higher in the early universe. Or the density of dark energy was higher, so the universe actually wasn’t that young after all. Or a linear combination of these things, and maybe a few others, that we can fit to the data. You don’t reconsider old theories in the light of new data, just apply more terms so that the old theory matches the new data.

For me, if the data starts to deviate from my model, it probably means that I need a different model

To which McGaugh et al. had this delicious reply:

One does not simply turn all the available baryons into stars.

You might consider reading Accelerated Structure Formation: The Early Emergence of Massive Galaxies and Clusters of Galaxies. The paper is absolutely wonderful. The main thesis of the paper is, “Wow, the James Webb Telescope sure has been finding some remarkably mature galaxies for the early universe. Maybe we should consider the possibility that the models we use to predict galaxy formation, specifically lambda CDM, are incorrect and Non-Physical.”

The author states the difficulty in the conclusion:

Despite the predictive successes of MOND, we do not yet know how to construct a cosmology based on it. In contrast, ΛCDM provides a good fit to a wide range of cosmological observables but does not provide a satisfactory explanation of the many phenomena that were predicted by MOND, nor is it clear that it can do so. We find ourselves caught between two very different theories that seem irreconcilable despite applying to closely related yet incommensurate lines of evidence.

The complaints about the early maturation of galaxies seen by the JWST was widely reported. My favorite line from that article:

“Maybe in the early universe, galaxies were better at turning gas into stars,” Chworowsky said.

Sure, it’s not that our theories of cosmology are incorrect; things like star formation were just different back in the early universe. I guess you just had to be there.

The fear of feedback loops is reasonable, but may not be inevitable. The reason complex life exists on this planet, in part, is that the biosphere evolved to prevent runaway climate change. As the life forms grew more varied and complex, the tools for maintaining a viable atmosphere also increased. So the Precambrian extinctions are attributed to changes that extremely primitive life forms couldn’t adapt to. Once life moved onto land, and trees, grasses, and flowers evolved, the number of ways for life to adapt went way up.

It should say something that the most recent mass extinction event (I mean, before the anthropocene), was caused by a giant asteroid and a decade(s?)-long winter, rather than a change in solar luminosity or runaway GHG shift.

With the advent of humans, this planet now has tools available for GHG and solar radiation management (SRM) that were unthinkable by nature. SRM with sulfur dioxide and air capture of CO₂ allow for the rapid reshaping of the climate almost as fast as fossil fuel combustion. As a result, the tools to stabilize the climate are available and their use is inevitable. The longer we wait to use them, the worse the problem gets and the more people are harmed, but given the unheard-of capacities that we’ve developed to stave off runaway global warming, I do not believe that humanity will choose extinction over GHG management and SRM.

Most of these thoughts come from Gaian Bottleneck Theory, which you can read more about here. You may be right, but I’m hoping you are wrong (no offense).

Yeah, FreeCAD is great, but I can only think of one project that I’ve done where SolveSpace absolutely could not work for the geometry I needed and I had to rebuild it in FreeCAD. But that’s just a product of what I am building: simple things like brackets, knobs, and replacement lids mostly. I don’t need chamfers, drafts, lofts, etc. and I get what I need with minimum of time and effort using SolveSpace.

When I do need those features, complex geometries, or modification of pre-built step files, FreeCAD has never failed me.

No one mentioned SolveSpace, so… SolveSpace. Solvespace is a fully functional 3D parametric CAD solver in a free, cross-platform, open-source, portable, single self-contained executable 10 MB file.

I do a fair amount of hobby 3d printing and SolveSpace makes design and CAD stupid easy. The interface is perfectly laid out, the hotkeys are intuitive, and the capabilities make small-scale projects a breeze.

Now, the program has its limitations, but if I just want something quick and simple, there is nothing better.

That was what happened to our data on the “family computer”. My parents were not happy with me that day.

Is this it?

First, find a rock.

As a preliminary test, you might look at a “sleep apnea adjustable mouthpiece” for sale online. I don’t know how well these work, but my custom sleep apnea dental device has been amazing for me. It may be that the boil-and-bite varieties also work well. If so, you might get relief without having to interact with the healthcare system.

You might find more information here.

As for the sleep test, many factors are important, but you could learn a lot from monitoring your pulse oxygen while you sleep. A casual search turned up several very affordable fingertip pulse oximeters that connect via Bluetooth. This would let you create a record of your pulse oxygen levels while you sleep. If you are dropping below 92% while you sleep (link), then you might be sleeping poorly because of sleep apnea.

In fact, you could record your SPO2 levels with and without the sleep apnea device to rule its use in or out without spending a ton of money on doctors visits and the like.

I hope things get better for you.

For anyone who feels this way after waking up from what should have been “enough” sleep, consider getting a home sleep test. Going from moderate sleep apnea to none was life-changing. If this is how you feel regularly, it doesn’t necessarily have to be this way.