Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

A question with backround

  1. Sep 29, 2011 #1
    Good morning, afternoon or evening to whomever may be reading. My name is Garrick Betts. I have a question that I feel may pertain to this area of physics. I must apologize now because this whole spiel will be a grammatical nightmare. Anyway... I have come to the recent acceptance/ agony of acceptance of my mortality. I feel when I pass I will experience no afterlife because my brain will die. There will be no further intake or ability to take in new information. With this recent thought pattern many random thoughts have been arising. The thoughts that I have had tonight have brought me here they are as follows: the human body is weak; martial arts, in a combat sense, would be easy with patience and anything else that lives is equally as weak. (I'm thinking oh well a tree seems pretty sturdy but no it is not it will die as well.) After these thoughts I was trying to think of what would be an apt image to focus on to develop strength, not super human, just something to aid the building of muscle, this coming from my time as a wiccan. So, I thought of a house, cool, non-living, but... made from previously alive things. The house will, in time erode. So, the question that I am posing to the scientific masses is this: what is the longest lasting, non-living, thing in the universe?
    Again, I do apologize for how jumbled this message is and my thoughts still aren't fully formed this was a spur of the moment had-to-know kind of thing. If you can make sense of this and can in any way empathize with me you are truly intelligent. Thank-you and have a good morning, afternoon or evening.
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 29, 2011 #2


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Red dwarf stars will live on for 100 trillion years - that's almost 10,000 times longer than the universe has been around to-date.

    If a red dwarf's lifespan were 80 years, that means the oldest one today would be an infantile 2 days old.
  4. Sep 29, 2011 #3


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Wouldn't a black hole last longer than a star? Unless the star were guaranteed to never travel near a black hole, which I don't think you could do.

    Thinking of your red dwarf star being sucked into a black hole would probably be a strange source of motivation and strength, though.

    I'd go with living things. Bristlecone pines live a long time. (In fact, there's a sad story of a researcher cutting down a bristlecone pine only to realize he'd just killed the oldest known living organism on Earth.)
  5. Sep 29, 2011 #4


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    They evaporate. Big ones in as little as 3 billion years. Small ones in as much as 10^67 years. (OK, that's longer than 100 trillion)

    Well, I assume he came to the Astro forum for a reason...
  6. Sep 29, 2011 #5


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Sorry? I think you've swapped big and small here.
  7. Sep 29, 2011 #6


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Similar Discussions: A question with backround
  1. A question. (Replies: 5)

  2. Question ? (Replies: 2)

  3. A question (Replies: 2)

  4. Questioning Gravity (Replies: 7)