Future Scientists

[Kizzi]

Do you think future scientists will devise a way of bringing themselves into existence, and is what we see around us the future scientists way for doing this? :)

 

The way I see it is if one imagines what it would be like without the universe, then I expect the enviroment would be VOID (Absolutely nothing).

 

So there seems to be one of two stable states for the universe:-

 

1. Void, and remaining Void for eternity.

2. Intelligent, where the intelligence devises a way for bringing itself into existence.

 

So what I'm suggesting, because we're here, is that we can conclude that State 2 is the stable state for this universe.

 

Also, along similar lines, I think a universe supporting intelligence (human/alien) is far more likely to exist than a universe which doesn't support intelligence. In fact I'm inclined to suggest that if a universe couldn't support intelligent life it wouldn't exist.....Only a VOID would exist.

 

;)

 

 

My final question is:-

 

Do you think future scientists will devise a way of transferring the consciousness of every living being that has ever existed, a nanosecond before death, to man-made eternal bodies in a man-made heaven for eternity?

 

;)

 

Kizzi

 

;)

[UncleAl]

Time travel violates causality. The universe does not tolerate contradiction. Reality simply happens. Mathematical models seek to emulate reality. There is no magic associated with reality, nor intelligence, nor is the death of anything including intelligent beings in any way special. There is no creator or caretaker, there is no "grand accounting" for your life. Violence is the solution to everything.

 

Do want you want - and be personally responsible for your actions. Remember the Eleventh Commandment and keep it wholly.

 

First World civilization collapses around 2015 when its Baby Boomers are retired and demand their free ride. Western civilization collapses by 2050 when all accessible petroleum reserves are exhausted. Earth can support at most 1 billion people living short, brutal, Third World lives. Like bacteria coming out of log growth phase in cell culture, it is way too late to avoid the Fall.

 

Have a nice future.

[Boerseun]

This Universe is ruled by ONE deity. Omnipotent, immortal, you name it - and His Name is Uncle Al.

[infamous]

This Universe is ruled by ONE deity. Omnipotent, immortal, you name it - and His Name is Uncle Al.

 

Ha,ha,ha,.....Good one Boerseun; But truly, Uncle is quite intelligent, if you have a queston about chemistry, he is quite capable of giving you a good anwser. Just overlook his delivery.

[Queso]

he accells in both content and delivery, if you ask me.

[infamous]

he accells in both content and delivery, if you ask me.

 

I certainly agree with you Orby on the content of Uncle's posts, but I would like to put the question of his delivery to a vote. Democracy at work.

[Boerseun]

Uncle Al's right to make an *** out of any idiot posting utter horsesh*t, must be defended! Democracy at work!

[Kizzi]

I know no one knows for sure about what caused the Big Bang, but I just think it's a bit illogical that from absolutely nothing, a Void, the Big Bang just happened due to some natural phenomena.

 

On the other hand I think it's logical that 'this place' could exist in one of two states as described above.

 

For example, imagine for one moment we're not here, and the universe is not here......just a Void is here. Then surely it's LOGICAL that the Void will stay VOID for eternity unless something(s) can devise a way of bringing itself(themselves) into existence. So the question is, since we're here, did our descendents devise a way of bringing themselves into existence, and is what we see the method our descendants used?

 

:)

 

Kizzi

[paultrr]

I know no one knows for sure about what caused the Big Bang, but I just think it's a bit illogical that from absolutely nothing, a Void, the Big Bang just happened due to some natural phenomena.

 

On the other hand I think it's logical that 'this place' could exist in one of two states as described above.

 

For example, imagine for one moment we're not here, and the universe is not here......just a Void is here. Then surely it's LOGICAL that the Void will stay VOID for eternity unless something(s) can devise a way of bringing itself(themselves) into existence. So the question is, since we're here, did our descendents devise a way of bringing themselves into existence, and is what we see the method our descendants used?

 

:)

 

Kizzi

 

For one the term "void" is not scientifically accurate to begin with. Its actually a left over from Biblical ideas of the origin of everything. The vacuum state this universe arose from was not a void or empty thing to begin with. It is what's known as a false vacuum state. The term "False" denotes it as unstable and subject to decay. Its unstable because it was not in its lowest possible energy condition. That implies at the start that there was energy there in what some term a void. By definition that alone says that the term void is the wrong term to be thinking of or using. Being unstable also tells us that the starting condition of the vacuum was such that it was bound to decay to a lower one which rater throws out the next argument you utilize. At that point all the rest is speculation based upon poor understanding of the concepts involved in the first place. If it was already natural that this false vacuum state would decay and it can be shown that such a decay would generate all the matter one finds in this universe there is no logical reason to invoke that somehow we must have devised a way of bringing ourselves into existence.

[Boerseun]

did our descendents devise a way of bringing themselves into existence, and is what we see the method our descendants used?

 

:)

 

Kizzi

 

I don't know about you, but the method my descendants normally use to come into existence, is to give me a late night out and a bottle of red wine. Some flowers for the intended victim normally helps, as well.

Now my ancestors, on the other hand, had a totally different way of coming into existence. They just clobbered hot-looking chicks over the head with anything close-by.

[Kizzi]

;) Paultrr said....... :)

 

If it was already natural that this false vacuum state would decay and it can be shown that such a decay would generate all the matter one finds in this universe there is no logical reason to invoke that somehow we must have devised a way of bringing ourselves into existence.

 

My physics isn't too good, but doesn't ENERGY have to have a source? Or doesn't the FALSE VACUUM have to have a source? Doesn't anything that's not VOID have to have a source? If something is 'running down' (ENERGY STATE) since the beginning, what's the source of the initial state? As I said my physics ain't too good. :)

 

I'm of the (logical) opinion that initially there was a void, and that there would still be a void, if it we're for some form of intelligence(s) devising a way of bringing themselves into existence, and I expect Future Human (Or ALIEN HUMANOID) is the intelligences. ;)

 

Could future scientists have devised a way of creating a Super Super Reality Machine SSRM (Advanced computer like machine) out of the Void. Could we be akin to software, information within the SSRM. ;)

 

Kizzi :D

[Kizzi]

I suppose if 0=+1-1 then 0 energy = + energy - energy!

 

Could the false vacuum have initially 0 energy,

but that decayed into +energy & -energy?

or matter & anti-matter?

 

Perhaps anti-matter was extremely unstable,

but matter was extremely stable,

this would account for the disappearance of anti-matter.

Is there any sign of what anti-matter degenerated into,

or why it would be unstable?

 

But if 0=+1-1, and if -1 was unstable,

unstable enough to disappear,

whats to stop +1 developing into {x,y,z},

and after z becoming intelligent,

to design a machine out of x & y,

and providing one can send the machine back through time,

to help in the 0=+1-1 process?

 

If we could get back to time zero and encourage the initial conditions to our benefit,

knowing what we do is going to 'Help' us in some way,

then we'd hardly stand back and idle-y let nature take it's course!

 

If time could be travelled,

this could set up a feedback loop,

the future encouraging the past,

moulding it,

to create the desired future:-

The emergence and application of intelligence:-

Humanoids.

 

:hyper:

 

Kizzi

[Kizzi]

Lets say we get access to the latest supercomputer,

and create a 'False Vacuum'.

Do you think it might be possible,

that some software humanoid in 'the future of the supercomputer',

has been able to mould the 'False Vacuum',

in order to bring the software humanoid into existence?

 

In otherwords,

 

would a computer simulation of a False Vacuum produce a universe with software humanoids of its own accord,

 

OR

 

would software humanoids produce a simulation of the universe in order to bring themselves into existence.

 

OR

 

would the software humanoids try to design the supercomputer itself, only to realize its already been done?

 

:hyper:

 

Kizzi

[Boerseun]

aaaaaaaaarrrrrrggghhhh!!!!!

 

Uncle Al!!!!

 

Help!!!

[nkt]

Right.

 

Assume that there was a big mess of stuff, compressed down to an unimaginable level. Turn of the magic compression field, and it will shortly start to expand.

 

Now, the energy that is in there is governed by E=mc^2, as is the matter. Let's assume everything was just energy, as it makes the next step easier.

 

As the energy converts into matter, it can become either matter or anti-matter.

 

As far as I know there is no explanation for why one side beat the other side, as all our experiments so far have shown that antimatter is exactly the same as matter in as much as mass being the same, stability, size, energy required, charges, etc.

 

However, it is postulated that at least one of the more common forms of anti-matter must be slightly less stable than the matter form, therefore some of this antimatter decayed back into energy, and therefore was not available to interact with the matter that was also formed. This lead to a dominance of matter over anti-matter.

 

Note that we could reverse the convention, and say everything we see was antimatter, and it would make no fundamental difference, in the same way that positive and negative are simply conventions.

 

 

EDIT: To avoid post whoring.

 

I just went back and read the first posts... Uncle Al forever!

 

Back to the road apples.

 

First there was nothing, then it exploded. That's the basic idea. (I think it is cyclical, an endless series of crunch:bangs. No, I have no idea which came first/what came before that!)

 

You could, in theory, get energy out of the vaccuum (what you call the void) using two plates with charge on them, and use some weird quantum effects to prevent the particles from recombining. Since you can let some of them decay while other half pairs have a longer half-life, you could probably do something with them. Use them to power your wormhole teleporter machine, or something... :hyper:

[Kizzi]

If it was already natural that this false vacuum state would decay and it can be shown that such a decay would generate all the matter one finds in this universe there is no logical reason to invoke that somehow we must have devised a way of bringing ourselves into existence.

 

:eek:

 

Then is there a God?

(There could still be a God I guess but not the God that we think, since the creation of the universe would be a natural phenomena).

The Creation event in the Bible, Koran, Torah would be misleading............

 

:D

 

Then what role do the future scientists play?

If they could just create a Super Reality Generator and become one with the software inside before bringing themselves into existence!

 

:hyper:

 

I think science has a whole lot more to find out,

and as I have to believe in something,

whilst considering the worst possible scenario,

to me it makes sense to support scientists

and hope they will find the solution to each and every problem!!!!!

 

;)

 

Kizzi

[Kizzi]

It's amazing to think that the universe just popped into existence because of the false vacuum!

 

Just a quick question.......why didn't gravity cause all the matter to form a black hole in the beginning, say x seconds after the big bang? Is it simply because the rate of expansion of the early universe was greater than the force of gravity?

 

Is the rate of expansion even greater now? So can one work backwards and know the rate of expansion of the universe x seconds after the big bang?

 

So, if the rate of expansion is greater now than x seconds after the big bang, why do black holes form now?

 

x expected to be a small number.

 

Something tells me this universe could possibly be a wind up.......there's an inconsistency in the above questions.

 

:rant:

 

Kizzi