Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ghostfuckbuddy t1_itoc4qc wrote

Yeah, some way to reverse entropy. That's the ultimate problem.

18

Anenome5 t1_iton4ut wrote

Eh not really. Why bother trying to reverse it when it can be near indefinitely forestalled.

Isaac Arthur has done the math, and we know of ways to, for instance, vastly extend the life of stars by removing their iron, for instance, and adding new hydrogen. And we can store massive quantities of fuel for them. Turn billions of years into quintillions of years.

Ways to run virtual civilizations on the energy output of black holes, long after the entire universe has gone dark.

8

ghostfuckbuddy t1_itp5z8q wrote

Sure, we could and it would be more technologically feasible. But as long as we're in sci-fi territory, I still think there's a huge difference between delaying oblivion and preventing it.

When we're young time seems to move at a glacial pace, but the older we grow, the faster time seems to move and the more we panic about our mortality. I think a similar psychology would still play out, only over astronomical timescales. And at least with normal death we still have some symbolic immortality through our children or societal impact. But at the end of the universe we'll just be staring into the dark, meaningless void. I think the second-half of the universe's lifespan could be pretty psychologically rough if a solution isn't found.

1

Anenome5 t1_itsuvxb wrote

> But as long as we're in sci-fi territory

That's just the thing though, there's nothing "scifi" about the idea of starlifting and extending the life of a star or storing hydrogen fuel for burning later. It's a mundane concept that could definitely be done, not a scifi idea that could not be done.

> When we're young time seems to move at a glacial pace, but the older we grow, the faster time seems to move and the more we panic about our mortality. I think a similar psychology would still play out, only over astronomical timescales.

I don't see why. A being with no mortality would also have no fear of mortality. In the future, and this part is more on the scifi scale, it is likely humanity will merge with machines and obtain essentially eternal "life" thereby, if a mechanical body could be called a form of life.

Such a being might be destroyed, but could be backed up in a thousand different places and thus able to resurrect over and over again. What would such a being have to fear?

> But at the end of the universe we'll just be staring into the dark, meaningless void. I think the second-half of the universe's lifespan could be pretty psychologically rough if a solution isn't found.

Turn inwards and build VR worlds, is the obvious answer, because such a place can be far better than the real world we live in now while feeling and looking just as real. This is considered one of the solutions to Fermi's paradox as well, in a universe where FTL is not possible, turn inwards, go virtual.

2

_SteerPike_ t1_itp7xaf wrote

Entropy can sometimes reverse spontaneously, and actually does so all the time in nanoscale systems. Doing the same for the universe as a whole is a bit more extreme, but it's still possible. Check out https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poincar%C3%A9_recurrence_theorem#:~:text=The%20Poincar%C3%A9%20recurrence%20time%20is,bound%20to%20a%20finite%20volume.

1

WikiMobileLinkBot t1_itp7yfg wrote

Desktop version of /u/_SteerPike_'s link: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poincaré_recurrence_theorem>

^([)^(opt out)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)

2

_SteerPike_ t1_itphuuz wrote

Good bot

1

B0tRank t1_itphvrg wrote

Thank you, SteerPike, for voting on WikiMobileLinkBot.

This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. You can view results here.

^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)

1