What?! Nothing! I'm not trying to criticize your grammar; there are a number of people here for whom English isn't their first language. I'm wondering, your grammar completely aside, whether you're one such person. I'm trying to understand your behaviour, and it occurred to me that a fundamental series of miscommunications due to language could be at fault. I'm going to assume given your response that I was wrong, and you think I'm saying that you're posts are grammatically incorrect... I'm not... I'm saying the CONTENT sometimes makes no sense.what's mine have to do with it?
Lets put aside the language issue then, if I'm wrong... how about the REST of my post?
Nismaratwork said:If not, then I have to say it seems to me you're more interested in word games than physics or cosmology. If you're genuinely interested in the physics of what you're asking, then the riddles and metaphors really don't do you or anyone else any good.
For instance, you say if it was "headed there, likely it would already be there." That's genuinely nonsensical, no two ways about it. The dissipation of radiation and the life-cycles of stars, black holes, and the "evening" out of radiation in a given space takes time. The simple answer is that it is precisely where the universe is headed, but we're not at that time yet, or anywhere near it.
If language isn't the issue, then I have no idea where you're getting this. From what I gather you're a computer or electrical engineer, so frankly you should realize that it's important to understand basics before moving on to more complex issues. You can't read a bit of wikipedia and expect to be competent in a debate about the fate of the universe, the nature of black holes as they're described by GR, and might be in a unified framework of quantum gravity.