You kind of DO, actually, if you're going to make that statement as a scientific fact. Otherwise you're just saying you don't think it would have an effect. They only way you could know that for sure is to figure out the relationship between, say, your hot breath and the nearby jet stream in a fluid dynamics model. Even in the simpler case -- your apartment -- you'd still have to model fluid dynamics in your apartment to account for the fact that your apartment is not a closed system and some parts of it will radiate heat (and therefore entropy) faster than others.I don't need to do ANY math to know that the force of my exhaled breath in the Midwest is not going to stir so much as a molecule of air on the East Coast.
Yes, because time travel is purely an element of science fiction and "Temporal physics" is purely an element of Star Trek. It does not cease to be fictional just because physicists like to dream about it as much as everyone else, nor does that change the fact that there are no working theories about how time travel could/would/should work in the real world.Nope, science fiction writers and fans have been debating such things for a long time.There is no such thing as "temporal physics." That's not a real discipline, and there are no theories pertaining to it. That is a concept that is ENTIRELY made up by Star Trek writers and/or Star Trek fans.Modern theories of temporal physics
And how the hell did you go from "Physicists don't ask the right questions" to "Here's a link to Michio Kaku's blog"? Isn't that like a full 180 of credibility there?

I just had a horrible image in my mind of Michio Kaku coming in as science advisor to Star Trek Beyond.
<shivers>