311–320 of 647 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That explains nothing.
Neither does the precursor to the Big Bang. It's the same exact thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My theory: There's no such thing as before and after “it”. It is it.
Block Universe. The more you think about it, the more probable it seems. Why should a universe pass time like a movie, if all moments could exist simultaneously? If there is no time, and it’s just a simulation formed in our brain, there doesn’t have to be a beginning nor end.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You’re stating this as if determinism has been proven beyond a doubt which is not the case.
I think it's unclear what kind of determinism you are presuming. Determinism in the universe? Determinism in consciousness? Certainly a deterministic machine can exist in a non-deterministic universe. However I didn't just assume a lack of free will. I also assumed a lack of identity . Do you realize that who you are is socially defined? When you breathe in, the air in the room around you becomes part of you. When yo…
Oh I have so many questions on this topic. I've often wondered about this. I don't have any direct physics training, but it's something that felt really plausible after I learned that the mass of a black hole is linearly proportional to its swarzschild radius. As the size of the black hole goes up, its overall density must decrease. Combined with the other observation that our universe has uniform density at large sc…
> As the size of the black hole goes up, its overall density must decrease. The center of a black hole is infinitely dense. That's why it even exists. The event horizon is not the black hole. > and the fixed density of our observed universe Our universe is expanding. It's density is not fixed. You really want to be thinking about this in terms of entropy and not matter.
And whether the density is fixed over time or not doesn't affect the question. Let's take the universe at its current average mass/energy density - whatever the "true" measure of that is.
To the best of our understanding, at large scales the density is uniform. So if we consider a suitably large spherical volume of space within our (presumably infinite) universe.. that volume will have an average mass/energy content greater than the threshold amount for a black hole of that apparent volume (again, using the external event horizon frame).
So that suggested to me that either we live in a finite universe, or we must be on the inside of an event horizon. It seems like an unavoidable conclusion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If only we had an even bigger universe, we would have more time... is that how it works?
Like this? https://hacker-recommended-books.vercel.app/category/5/past-...
Oh I have so many questions on this topic. I've often wondered about this. I don't have any direct physics training, but it's something that felt really plausible after I learned that the mass of a black hole is linearly proportional to its swarzschild radius. As the size of the black hole goes up, its overall density must decrease. Combined with the other observation that our universe has uniform density at large sc…
> Combined with the other observation that our universe has uniform density at large scales s/has/had at the time of recombination It is largely an assumption of LCDM that we can treat the universe as practically homogeneous throughout its entire evolution but potentially not a very well-founded at that [0, 1]. > I always felt uncomfortable with that characterization. It seems more reasonable to me to think of dark e…
Interesting read, but even if we assume the author is correct, and the cosmos formed as a black hole in a larger universe, the question remains, how did this larger universe formed, then? Might just be impossible to know.
Suggested hard sci-fi light reading: "Cosm" by Gregory Benford, 1999. A universe the size of a bowling ball created in a laboratory. The scientist responsible for it, keeping it safe and on the run from gvt spooks. They want to protect it for as long as it lasts, and since its time is as relative as its size, they won't have long to wait.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The center of a black hole is infinitely dense. That's why it even exists. The event horizon is not the black hole. Arguing semantics is rather boring when it's obvious you understood the point he was trying to make. > Our universe is expanding. It's density is not fixed. None of that precludes uniform density at large scales.
I think a point they are trying to make is that the border of a black hole is only to us outside observers, if you yourself fell into one you wouldn't notice anything specific when you crossed the boundary. The popular example of hawking radiation references a border and pairs of particles, however its actually only to help people understand the idea of what is going on
Wouldn't you notice that fairly suddenly everything's getting brighter because all the light/radiation is sucked back in?