Timeline for answer to A brief dip into the heat death of the universe by Youstay Igo
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
Post Revisions
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 12, 2016 at 21:33 | vote | accept | Liesmith | ||
| Mar 12, 2016 at 18:09 | history | edited | Youstay Igo | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added a reminder after the link to the article.
|
| Mar 12, 2016 at 18:06 | comment | added | Youstay Igo | Hahah! Yes I understand. No offense taken. $L_a_t_e_x$ is always a headache for me. Yes I agree that people could make a misjudged perception from that article. I think I should add a reminder with it. | |
| Mar 12, 2016 at 17:31 | comment | added | HDE 226868♦ |
@YoustayIgo I understand you didn't base anything important off of it; I applaud you for that. I just wanted to make sure that people didn't get the wrong idea. (By the way, you can use {} for $\LaTeX$ to get more than one number into the exponent, so $10^{50}$ will get you $10^{50}$.)
|
|
| Mar 12, 2016 at 7:46 | comment | added | Youstay Igo | @HDE226868: Yes I agree with you on that. I haven't based any critical postulation on that. I did suggest OP to read it as I found it very informative and interesting. And yes, I agree that that article is based on a bit too far fetched idea. Some other articles place the end universe time estimate at $10^50$ - $10^70$ years or so when the Great Rip would occur, tearing apart all particles, leaving nothing behind. = all the matter of our universe would return to its origin (nothingness) | |
| Mar 11, 2016 at 23:19 | comment | added | Richard | @corsiKa - "Ooh, is that a proton? No. Wait, it's not." -Repeat for the next infinity years. | |
| Mar 11, 2016 at 23:03 | comment | added | HDE 226868♦ | Be very, very careful about that National Geographic article. In the six years since, it doesn't seem like much evidence has come out that supports the ideas presented therein about the predicted 5 billion year cutoff. | |
| Mar 11, 2016 at 20:39 | comment | added | corsiKa | @AvrohomYisroel Pros: You manage to survive the heat death of the universe and gather useful data. Cons: You're very, very lonely now. :-( | |
| Mar 11, 2016 at 15:24 | comment | added | Youstay Igo | The emphasis was on yet in that sentence ;) | |
| Mar 11, 2016 at 15:23 | comment | added | Avrohom Yisroel | "We just don't know yet" - no, but if we hang around for long enough, we may find out :) | |
| Mar 11, 2016 at 14:40 | history | edited | Youstay Igo | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Some grammar corrections and included missed words.
|
| Mar 11, 2016 at 14:31 | comment | added | Youstay Igo | When you stretch the time to such astronomical levels as you suggested in your question, all our current knowledge fades away into oblivion and guesswork. Basically our understanding of the fate of universe depends on a grand unification theory which would employ both quantum mechanics and general relativity. This hasn't been achieved yet ... | |
| Mar 11, 2016 at 14:20 | comment | added | Liesmith | Thanks, I hadn't even considered that atoms would break down like that over such a huge timescale. I'll mark this as the answer if I don't get some other super-detailed response in the next 24 hours. | |
| Mar 11, 2016 at 14:00 | history | answered | Youstay Igo | CC BY-SA 3.0 |