Sure, but anything that tried to explain the observations would be a dark matter theory, and if that theory involved particles, it’d be a particle theory.

Dark matter isn’t a theory, nor is it particles, it’s just a body of observations that’s poorly named. In that sense, dark matter definitely exists, we just don’t know in what shape or form.

They don’t “communicate” faster than light, the wave function itself is non-local and collapses non-locally.

Dark matter is not a thing, it’s an observation, a phenomenon that was poorly named. There’s so much evidence under the name “[d]ark matter” that we can’t discount it as a real phenomenon. We just don’t have a strong evidence for a single dark matter theory (theory in the scientific sense of the word, not the colloquial one).

I can get two whoppers for about 5 dollars and they are full of flavor over here (Brazil).

There are two very different things that take the form •'s:

1. as the clitic version of a verb, is, has, and sometimes was and does; 2) as the genitive/possessive case marker.

2. can be attached at the end of all noun phrases, even when the noun phrases is a single pronoun, like it: it’s=it is, it has (or it was and it does in some dialects).

3. can be attached to all noun phrases except to personal pronouns. These inflect, they change their forms: I>my, mine; you>your, yours; he>his; she>her, hers; it>its; we>our, ours; they>their, theirs.

Historically, the genitive case marker •'s originated from inflectional morphology in the form of •es. Different classes of nouns would have different case markers but the •es version ended up prevailing over the others as english shed its case system. The apostrophe that turned •es into •'s seems to have come from imitating the french practice of using an apostrophe where a vowel wasn’t pronounced anymore.

https://youtu.be/cHEOsKddURQ

Here is an excelent Kurzgesagt video.

Colombia*

Commenting to check later.

The word has always had a t sound since Old English, and it’s part of the reconstructed language Proto-Germanic in the form *ufta. Every other Germanic language displays a t in the corresponding word:

Scots oftin (“often”), North Frisian oftem (“often”), Saterland Frisian oafte (“often”), German oft (“often”), Pennsylvania German oft (“often”), Danish ofte (“often”), Norwegian Bokmål ofte (“often”), Norwegian Nynorsk ofte (“often”), Swedish ofta (“often”), and Icelandic oft (“often”).

Source

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supertask

I really like that description! The study of choice. I think that under that lens I’ll be able to appreciate art in a new way. Thanks.

But snakes are legless lizards. Link to youtube

Edit: Wrong link, I’ll leave the previous one anyways because it’s also fun https://youtu.be/_5jNZyoSszE

This isn’t entirely true either. The adjective “binario” has to agree with the gender of what’s being talked about, either the grammatical gender of the noun or the natural gender of the person. A salient example could be the noun “piloto”. Just as adjectives inflect for gender so do pronouns, so you can say “el piloto” or “la piloto” depending on the natural gender of the person, and inflect adjectives accordingly. Grammatical gender and natural gender are both distict concepts that impact gender inflection in spanish.

The research you are basing your third paragraph on was actually never published and its claims have remained controversial.

I recommend you check this great video on both grammatical gender and Boroditsky’s article: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1q1qp4ioknI