What do you think will be the fate of the universe?

[gonzo]

Nereid, I just have to say that you are my new hero. Do you do this professionally, or just on newgroups?

 

[setAI]

the fate of the universe should be the same as any other natural thing: it will be adapted into a technological resource wholly or partially controlled by intelligence- and it's structure and evolution will be fundementally redefined long before any natural crunch/rip/heat-death occurs-

I say this because it is simply not possible to speculate on the future evolution of a universe where intelligence exists without considering the possible global effects of intelligence-

this makes speculation quite untenable- so the question cannot really be considered- but I feel that the popular presumption that intelligence is just "along for the ride" and can have no important impact on cosmic evolution is wrong-headed

 

[Gold Barz]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/07/040728090338.htm

 

[Nereid]

First of all, who is saying that the entire body of evidence is this one mammal? You have already brought up the idea that certain religious groups have their own body of evidence. Why stop at these two examples? How do you know that I have no other examples?

I don't, and stand corrected ... do you have other examples?

What do we know? We know about nature here on earth. You are supposing that nature is composed of numerous types of complexity, and that one type should not be used as evidence to enable understanding of other types. I consider that you are the one who is stretching the evidence thin.

This seems to illustrate well a difference of approach - I do not rule out anything, I merely insist that we stick to the approach commonly called 'the scientific method' (at least, while we are having a discussion in a science section of PF). Earlier you suggested that you would post a protocol for this discussion; I'm open to that (but will insist that it be one which is consistent with the scientific method).

If we might agree on the cyclic nature of several facts of earth, all of which the observational evidence allows us to examine in great detail, then perhaps we might recognize the value of expanding it to include extra-terrestrial concepts.

Indeed we might ... and a good way to proceed would be for you (or a Buddhist, or GoldBarz, or anyone) to propose a 'theory of cycles' (or something like that), from which predictions can be made, and which we can go test ... in the lab or through observations.

Of course, to be useful, as science, it would be highly desirable for this 'theory of cycles' to give quantitative predictions, and for it to be fully consistent with the best science we have today ... such as GR, QM, modern theories of evolution, ...

You talk about hand-waving similarity of our species of mammal. Yet, how do you know about the universe? Through the mind of this very mammal. You would divorce your ideas from the organism that enables such ideas to exist.

Hmm, I don't understand this; are you making a philosophical point about the primacy of consciousness? Perhaps you would consider joining this excellent philosophical discussion (elsewhere in PF)!

 

[Gold Barz]

What do you guys think of other Pockets Of Space/Time existing outside of ours? the possibility? probability?

 

[Chronos]

What do you guys think of other Pockets Of Space/Time existing outside of ours? the possibility? probability?

They are irrelevant.

 

[Nereid]

What do you guys think of other Pockets Of Space/Time existing outside of ours? the possibility? probability?

If you can describe how such things could be observed, even if only from their indirect footprints, even if only in principle, then we might be able to have a good discussion of this, here in GA&C. Otherwise, how would you distinguish ideas such as these from fact-free speculation?

 

[Gold Barz]

thats true they are irrelivant i just wanted to see how many of you believe that they exist

 

[Chronos]

Irrelevant = they do not exist in the language of physics. The probability of them not existing is 100%.

 

[Gold Barz]

well that's true, so the probability of them existing is what percentage? 50%? 100%?because were living in one

hey could it be that the universe goes through phases, like right now were just in a transition to another form or something of that idea?

 

[turbo]

well that's true, so the probability of them existing is what percentage? 50%? 100%?because were living in one

hey could it be that the universe goes through phases, like right now were just in a transition to another form or something of that idea?

Here is an old paper by Lee Smolin in which he turned the anthropic principle on its head and speculated that all the unitless constants in our Universe are at their current values to maximize the production of black holes, which in turn become isolated universes. This paper will make your head hurt!

http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/9404011

 

[Gold Barz]

isolated universes? do the author mean like a bubble universe?

 

[turbo]

isolated universes? do the author mean like a bubble universe?

Just read the paper and you'll see... He said not only that black holes are separated from our universe by their event horizons (pretty non-controversial), but that the inhabitants of such black hole universes will look out around themselves and find themselves looking back in time to a singularity, just like we do. Hum...

 

[Gold Barz]

cool, i am going to read it tomorrow