Mr. Bickmore should avoid astrophysics. He understands little. The incorrect explanation of “the twins paradox” Is one instance of his lack of understanding as @msf explained.
Re a second assertion: “Einstein theorized there was no fixed frame of reference in the universe, and everything moves relative to everything else.“
Yes, originally. But Einstein later abandoned that concept after the 1929 findings by Edwin Hubble which pointed to an expanding universe. The now widely accepted “fixed frame of reference” is the Big Bang - from which everything is moving away
Here’s how Wikipedia explains Einstein’s earlier static universe and how his belief changed as new data became available:
“Einstein's static universe, also known as the Einstein universe or the Einstein world, is a relativistic model of the universe proposed by Albert Einstein in 1917. Shortly after completing the general theory of relativity, Einstein applied his new theory of gravity to the universe as a whole. Assuming a universe that was static in time, and possessed of a uniform distribution of matter on the largest scales, Einstein was led to a finite, static universe of spherical spatial curvature.“
“Following the discovery by Edwin Hubble of a linear relation between the redshifts of the galaxies and their distance in 1929, Einstein abandoned his static model of the universe and proposed expanding models such as the Friedmann-Einstein universe and the Einstein-de Sitter universe. In both cases, he set the cosmological constant to zero, declaring it ‘no longer necessary ... and theoretically unsatisfactory.’ “
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein's_static_universe

@msf +1

[Special relativity twin paradox]

Because the twin traveling is moving close to the speed of light when they return, the time it took them to travel millions of miles may have only been a few days, while the lapse of time for the twin on Earth may have been multiple years. Time was relative to the rate at which the twin was traveling.

Just another example of a financial writer lifting something out of context, not comprehending it, and then misapplying it.
The whole point of special relativity is that there are no absolute positions or motions, everything is relative. (Only the speed of light is absolute.) You cannot say that one twin is traveling away from the earth and that the other twin is "standing still". Such a suggestion reeks of Ptolemy. From each twin's perspective, it is the other twin who is moving.
If neither twin altered course (so that, relatively speaking, both continued traveling in straight lines), then each would see the other aging more slowly and each would be correct. It is when one twin reverses direction that the twin moves from one frame of reference to another and that time appears to "jump".
Here's what's happening:
https://properphysics.wordpress.com/2014/05/28/a-no-nonsense-introduction-to-special-theory-of-relativity-part-4/

Illuminating to say the least: https://bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-21/behind-ken-fisher-s-ads-a-hardball-culture-reels-in-billions

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/25/billionaire-investor-ron-baron-sees-the-dow-at-650000-in-50-years.html
Billionaire investor Ron Baron sees Dow 650,000 in 50 years — about 25 times higher than today
If we can live 50 more yrs that would be great

You were there first @Ted. I shoulda known. Didn’t know Art’s health was at issue. Sad. Truthfully, I was just curious what brand of whiskey he drank when I searched Google trying to find out. Than up popped this very recent article. A real Wall Street legend. Worthy of double-links.
PS ... Art’s caption, “The Market’s Broad and Deep ...” , reminded me of Frost’s “The woods are lovely dark and deep.” That’s what initially grabbed my attention and made the story seem possibly worth kicking over to the Discussions + area.
Regards
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/42891/stopping-by-woods-on-a-snowy-evening

Yeah, a press realease FOR Finra. Here's more how it's really like with self-regulation:
https://wsj.com/articles/finra-arbitrators-let-thousands-of-brokers-purge-infraction-records-1542459600
And this: https://nytimes.com/2016/06/04/business/dealbook/finra-arbitration-case-offers-a-peek-into-a-murky-world.html

Anything really happen today? Dow down. NASDAQ up on Tesla. Nice bounce in gold to well over $1500. Oil’s firming up.
Nice article on Art Cashin’s career / some spending wisdom. Art’s one of those guys who’s forgotten more about investing than most of us will ever know. But Dewars?
Though he accepts that technology has transformed his trade, he resists letting it take over his private life. Right down to his aversion to credit cards ... “If you pay in cash, nobody knows where you drink, when you drink, how much you drink," he said, peeling from a wad of bills to pay for a round. "With cash, you can have privacy." https://www.princegeorgecitizen.com/washington-post/business/how-arthur-cashin-became-the-ambassador-of-the-new-york-stock-exchange-1.23950928

FYI:
Regards,
Ted
https://www.cnbc.com/video/2019/10/24/video/2019/10/08/cashin.html?&qsearchterm=Art Cashin

Howdy folks,
Love reading your thoughts.
I'm staying in a rope-a-dope with my heavy parking place at Price RPSIX. Still riding my momentum play in the junior silver miners, but standing pat as things resolve themselves. I still really like stocks that pay me a dividend particularly if I'm customer of theirs [read: T, CMS, VZ] and can never, ever, ever stay away from NCV with a yield of 11%.
Couple of thought from above. Being older absolutely changes your approach to risk as you don't have the time to 'revert to the mean'. This is compounded if this is an account from which you're taking distributions. The 2000 dot.com meltdown impacted my wifes 401(k) distributing acct from Vanguard it ran out in about 12 years. And it was invested very conservatively.
Inflation. The tricks they play with the numbers are obscene. Hedonic adjustments (i.e. if it's new and improved they can charge more without it counting. Can you still get the old unimproved model?) Is hamburger a substitute for stead? Which housing metric dampens the number? feh. http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/inflation-charts
Whether you care for shadow stats or not, it is one measure of inflation that seems to better reflect what I experience every day.
Lastly, this too shall pass and I too have my shopping list.
However, I must admit that I am ashamed to be an American and I spent 20 months in 'nam.
and so it goes,
peace,
rono

FYI: If one were to participate in one of my company’s meeting, they would most likely hear a conversation surrounding Charlie Munger’s concept of mental models. Munger believes one should study and understand the fundamentals of multiple core subjects, such as math and physics. Fundamentally understanding those subjects develops new mental models to solve an array of problems. Let’s take Munger’s mental-model concept and applying it to financial planning, and how there should be a theory of relatively for wealth.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.advisorperspectives.com/articles/2019/10/23/are-you-rich-or-wealthy

@hank
You noted: "Catch - It’s way outside my expertise. But this era of ultra-low rates seems bizarre, to say the least. And it’s prevailed much longer than most would have expected. I suppose the answer is to throw your money at the stock market and pull 20% a year, rather than settling for just 2-3% from cash or government bonds."
I agree with the first two I have set in bold above; but the third depends on what one may see as a trend until I isn't. Then it may be run for cover, not unlike equities unwinding for whatever reason(s).
The 2-3% yields from government bonds are here and now. But, the yield path continues a slow drift downward (bump up a few weeks ago, but lower again the past few days). This action for bonds continues to cause price action to the positive from the buy demand.
So, U.S. bond buying continues for numerous reasons as to safety and/or a combination of safety away from the equity markets and the negative bond yields in other countries.
As to the 20% from equity, yes; another area that is maintaining for the time.
I offer these few performance blips for relatively safe bonds, with the exception of the corp. bonds; which I suspect will melt in value if the equity market starts to go negative for a longer time frame.

Bond etfs, YTD returns down a bit from 2 weeks ago, which was a near time high price point:
---TIP =+7.6% (inflation bonds, mixed duration)
--- IEF = +9.1% (7-10 yr notes)
--- LQD = +15.7% (corp. bonds)
--- LTPZ = +17.5% (long duration TIPs bonds)
--- EDV = +23% (extended duration gov't)
--- ZROZ = +25.4% (zero coupon bonds)
The above gains are also reflected in many broad bond funds that may contain mixes of these bond types.
IF yields froze in their tracks starting tomorrow, then yes; holding a bond (fund) for yield only would be a problem, as the price appreciation has likely stopped, too.
Not unlike a nice equity fund known to pay a decent dividend; if all the companies within that fund became price range bound + or - .5%, then the only remaining value would be the dividend, let us example at 2%.
Both holdings would become a wash against one another for profit potential, eh?
Ok, the sleep clock arrives. Hoping I have not caused confusion; but money still may be made in bond holdings if yields continue to some unknown bottom pushing up the prices, where the money is being made (this statement applies to U.S.).
Be well,
Catch

The closest Vanguard match to TAIFX would be VTMFX. Unlike Wellesley it uses muni bonds for its fixed income sleeve. Also, while TAIFX and VTMFX have roughly 50/50 asset allocations, Wellesley's is closer to 40/60 (bond heavy).
VTMFX manages its equity holdings directly, so it can control cap gains a bit better than TAIFX which holds equity funds that are not tax-sensitive. This is reflected in a somewhat better tax cost ratio over the past 1 and 3 years as calculated by M*.
TAIFX tax cost ratios: http://performance.morningstar.com/fund/tax-analysis.action?t=TAIFX
VTMFX tax cost ratios: http://performance.morningstar.com/fund/tax-analysis.action?t=VTMFX

Trivia. The Roy and Rose Papp management team was a father and daughter-in-law combination. How rare is that?
https://www.nytimes.com/1997/06/01/business/one-family-two-generations-three-feisty-funds.html

Even if you are in a lower tax bracket, munis can be useful if they keep from bumping to a higher bracket. That is our situation. Although we are solidly in the 12% bracket, we’ve been doing Roth IRA conversions that push our total income close to the 22% bracket. If we had savings in taxable bonds rather than munis, we have to limit our Roth conversions to keep from reaching the 22% bracket.

Ol' Ted

My impression with quantum computing is it is not a speed benefit they're really seeking but a complexity problem-solving one. A quantum computer could solve problems current computers with their binary yes/no 0/1 systems can't because life isn't lived or experienced in a binary way.

According to this piece in The Balance, the yields on AAA munis are typically about 80% of Treasury yields. I've seen figures that are a little higher, but that's in the right ballpark.
What this means is that on average, unless you're in the 22% or higher tax bracket, munis aren't going to make much sense for you.
Suppose you invest $1,000 in a Treasury yielding 2%. You'll get $20 in interest in a year. If you're in a 12% bracket, then you'll have $17.60 after taxes. If you're in the 22% bracket, you'll have $15.60 after taxes.
If you'd invested in a muni yielding 80% as much, you'd have 80% x $20 = $16 interest. That's a good deal compared with the Treasury if you're in the 22% bracket, but not so good if you're in the lower 12% bracket.
If you do a search on muni treasury ratio, you'll come up with sites with current data.
R W Baird reports the current ratio (for 10 year maturity bonds) is 85%.
Raymond James reports 83.5% (10 year), and says that last week the ratio was 80.2%.

@hank et al
Posted as fund discussion, as this may indeed evolve or devolve to affect investments.
This is an expansion of your link post in the BUY SELL HOLD thread.
I've read about the REPO since the start several weeks ago, though I have not posted any links.
CHECK comments in linked report for other observations.
JP Morgan/Dimon REPO markets statement

Sold off one of my money market mutual funds since there has been news, of late, about liquidity concerns in the repo market.

Here’s a Bloomberg story about what some are calling the “repo mess.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-09-22/repo-market-s-liquidity-crisis-has-been-a-decade-in-the-making
After I fully comprehend @Catch22’s post re quantum computing *, along with why people are buying negative yielding bonds , I’ll try to get my head around repos. However, it seems to me that if repos came unglued it would throw many other global markets into turmoil - probably equities and, even more likely, funds that employ derivatives / leverage in pursuit of outsized gains. If you’ve been waiting for a sharp reversal in interest rates, this might be the cow that finally kicks the can over (to milk a metaphor to death).
*Here’s a link to Catch’s quantum computing story: https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/53776/google-has-given-us-the-first-experimental-evidence-that-quantum-speed-up-is-achievable-real-world