this post was submitted on 31 Mar 2024
165 points (87.7% liked)

Showerthoughts

29793 readers
890 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. A showerthought should offer a unique perspective on an ordinary part of life.

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. Avoid politics
    • 3.1) NEW RULE as of 5 Nov 2024, trying it out
    • 3.2) Political posts often end up being circle jerks (not offering unique perspective) or enflaming (too much work for mods).
    • 3.3) Try c/politicaldiscussion, volunteer as a mod here, or start your own community.
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 9thDragon@lemmy.world 66 points 7 months ago (3 children)

The universe is too young for that to be likely.

[–] BallShapedMan@lemmy.world 44 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Yup, all the evidence scientists point to agree that if anything we are early to the party.

[–] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 22 points 7 months ago (3 children)

It's wild to think that we may be what aliens call "the elder races" or "precursors" or something like that, depending on if we survive that long.

[–] BallShapedMan@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago (1 children)

For reals! Then the young races introduce themselves and we demand they dab as an introduction lol

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 2 points 7 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://m.piped.video/watch?v=Z8iitosoTbk

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

Our elephants may become the precursors, we are likely to just become a thrall race.

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Man I think it's so damn optimistic that you think we'll be around long enough to be an elder race, or even leave enough of a mark to be called a precursor.

[–] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 4 points 7 months ago

I agree, that's why I added the caveat. Doesn't seem very likely... But it's so interesting to think about

[–] DessertStorms@kbin.social 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The observable universe is too young for that to be likely

The difference is vast probably beyond anything we can imagine.

[–] HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social 13 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Given that we can see the CMB it seems unlikely that the universe is older elsewhere.

[–] cynar@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Interestingly it's possible the universe could be older elsewhere. One of the theories regarding the big bang is that space-time underwent a phase change. The higher level phase had sufficiently different physics to let the energy level equalise despite the speed of light limits.

There is no reason the entire thing collapsed back into its current state at once. 1 theory has it happening as energy density dropped below a critical limit. Others have "bubbles" of "normal" space time forming, and expanding through the unshifted medium. There is no reason bubbles couldn't be massively apart, temporally. The catch is, the bubbles will likely never have any communication, rendering the point abstract at best.

There's also no reason the bubbles collapsed the same way. Other bubbles could have a vastly different flow rate of time, or a different number of spacial dimensions.

This is all head-of-a-pin physics however. As it stands, we couldn't detect even a type 3 civilization out near the edge of our observable universe. That is also before light cone issues.

[–] HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I'd be interested in reading more about this, if you have any pointers. It seems to me to be an interesting semantic question as to whether other bubbles of spacetime beyond our own, running at a different temporal rate (from the outside? By what universal clock?) count as part of our universe or not. From the description you gave, it seems like maybe even FTL wouldn't be enough to reach them.

[–] cynar@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago

Not got anything to particularly hand. It's mostly offhand articles and pub discussions (drunken freeform thinking is remarkably common and useful in physicists, let alone with undergrads). By its nature, it is into the realm of philosophy, rather than science. It is untestable, since there couldn't be any communication with other bubbles.

As for the time flow, it's fairly arbitrary. We perceive ourselves moving through time via indirect means. Those are potentially an illusion, even in our bubble. The rate of entropy, or the speed of light could be vastly different. That would change the perceived "speed of time" (whatever that means!) compared to some arbitrary communal rest frame.

The big issue is that we don't currently understand our own space-time. Speculating on over variances is very much "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin".

If you want something a little more scientific, cosmic bubble theory is the current version of the theory.

Oh, and the same base assumptions basically preclude FTL. In a relativistic universe, FTL is time travel, with all the resultant problems (tachyonic anti-telephone being just the most obvious)

[–] DessertStorms@kbin.social -1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Considering even the modest estimates of the size of the entire universe compared to the tiny sphere we can observe, I think it'd be pretty arrogant to think our spec is getting enough information to say anything about the universe as a whole is unlikely.

[–] roguetrick@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago

This isn't really a counterargument to what he said. The limits of our observable universe is the CMB. It's the beginning of the universe. The farther we see, the more redshifted it is, the farther in the past it is. Hot, dense, and redshifted is the CMB.

[–] Apytele@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Ooc how do we know it's young? We haven't exactly witnessed the lifespans of any other universes to compare it to!

[–] Sylver@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago (1 children)

No but we can estimate the total age before cosmic inflation renders the universe cold and so far spread out so as to be considered “dead”

That timeline is around 10^27 years, of which we only right now have been around for about 10^9. So we are VERY young compared to the max age. On the cosmological timescale, we are still “being born”

[–] Apytele@sh.itjust.works 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I appreciate you answering the question genuinely as I was genuinely curious!

[–] spittingimage@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Another factor is estimating the total amount of hydrogen available to form new stars. The last estimate I heard was nine times as much as is currently bound up in stars.

[–] Apytele@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 months ago

That's fascinating I would've thought most of it is in stars and the rest is a miniscule amount by comparison like 98% or more was in stars or something.