Re: Time - Crunch or Stretch? (was Re: Big Bang is Bunk)

Date: Sat Jul 28 2001 - 09:45:06 MDT

In a message dated 7/28/2001 4:05:34 AM Eastern Daylight Time, writes:

<< I should point out that the cosomology has moved on from this one -- poor
 Tipler outlined a great and moving final resurrection analogy (pretty
 similar to Greg Bear's storyline in Eternity, funnily enough, small
 universe), but the cosmological underpinnings of his model were pulled out
 from under his feet within twelve months of publication.
 Insofar as we can say anything about the future behavior of the universe,
 the big crunch seems to be an increasingly outside bet. Long, cold, dark and
 isotropic is the current forerunner...
 ...not that we don't get to experience a subjective eternity in either case.
 It's a funny old world.
 Reason >>

As you did note-its merely the current forerunner, on the other hand, other
astronomers and cosmologists have come to see an accelerated expansion as a
fairly recent thing. There is also counter theories, based on the same
observations that suggest frequent expansions and partial collapses.
Physicist Larry Krauss at Case Western University has suggested that we'll
never know the fate of the universe. Baring that, I tend to agree with
Kurzweil, that the fate of the universe will be decided, not by the weak
nuclear force, the strong force, electromagnetism, or even gravity, but by
intelligence; in which the other four forces crumble in the face of.


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:39:58 MDT