[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 34 KB, 230x368, 9781853260391_1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8765309 No.8765309 [Reply] [Original]

What are the implications of the time that we exist in? Scientists estimate the current age of the universe at about 14 billion years.
They estimate that stars will continue to form normally for another 1-100 trillion years. That means that we exist in the first 1-0.01% of time in the Universe (not counting the time that black holes will continue to exist, etc.)

To me it's fascinating that we exist very close to the birth of the universe- so close that we can theoretically see it with a telescope. So what are some of the implications of this? How would things be different if we existed 100 billion or 1 trillion years from the start of the universe?

>> No.8765521

>>8765309
I thought we were about halfway through the stelliferous period

>> No.8765525

>>8765309
when will brainlets realoze that these aren't coincidences but evidence that we live in a simulation

>> No.8766895

>>8765309
>How would things be different if we existed 100 billion or 1 trillion years from the start of the universe?
we would be much better off

>> No.8767530

>>8765521
Idk, I just got that number from Wikipedia. The only place I could find the term stelliferous was in the book The Five Ages of The Universe, where it says the stelliferous period is 6<n<14, which indicates we still have some time to go, as 10^14 is 100 trillion years

>>8765525
I think it's funny how people accept the simulation hypothesis with open arms but they will take up arms whenever somebody mentions god.

>>8766895
How so?

>> No.8767559

>>8767530
Simulation hypothesis doesn't really mean that there is a creator. A simulation could arise spontaneously.
Also, the word "god" is fraught with dogmatism, anti-scientificism and other backward ideas.

>> No.8767568

>>8767559
Is there any scientific argument for reality being a simulation?

>> No.8767573
File: 728 KB, 2515x2515, rvLSskV.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8767573

>>8765309
>the current age of the universe

Observable universe.

Please, stop with this mistake

>> No.8767590

>>8767573
The age of the universe and the observable universe would be the same, no? Can you explain yourself please?

And why did you post a picture of radio broadcasts?

>> No.8767606

>>8765309
>How would things be different if we existed 100 billion or 1 trillion years from the start of the universe?
Due to the expansion of space, we would probably think our galaxy was the entire universe. We would be unable to see all the other galaxies we can see today.

>> No.8767632

>>8767559
>A simulation could arise spontaneously.
It's impossible to make predictions about what is supposed to be going on outside of our universe, but the idea that a simulation could arise without the guidance of something we might as well call a god seems implausible to my tiny universe-locked brain.

>> No.8767655

>>8765309
If life is present and we are not an anomaly, I imagine one implication of an older universe would be that there is more life, as well as more advanced life.

>>8767559
Except there is little to no difference in believing in something that is at best an insubstantial thought exercise and some kind of deity or creator.