As such, the second law appears to hold a chilling prophecy for humanity in the very long term.
The idea that our species is so uniquely capable of transcending extinction and surviving long enough for the fate of the universe to be relevant to it is optimistic to the point of absurdity. It fits the evidence better to suppose that we're particularly capable of self destruction.
zdc1 2 hours ago [-]
Even if we don't self-destruct, we will likely have evolved into something else completely different by then. Or maybe a million years from now they will keep some humans (based on present-day DNA) in a museum exhibit somewhere. Or maybe that's us.
qgin 2 hours ago [-]
I still maintain that we're not just a simulation, we're a screensaver on the computer of some extradimensional office worker who has been out of office for their version of a weekend.
It's a common response to any interest in the destiny of humanity: "what's so special about humanity? What about bacteria, huh?"
I don't know, I'm human and humans tend to be social and interested in their own species? Is that weird? Does that not apply to you? Do you consider it petty and parochial to be more interested in one's own species? Are you "above" that?
If any bacteria or humans are interested in projecting the future of bacteria and their probability of surviving humanity, they should absolutely go for it.
chamomeal 19 minutes ago [-]
I don’t think that’s that delichon is saying. It’s absurd to compare the lifetime of ANY species with the lifetime of the universe. The heat death of the universe is like 10^80 years away or something insane. Humans have been around for like… 10^5 years?
Even if something from earth lived that long, it wouldn’t be human. It probably wouldn’t be remotely recognizable!
moomin 25 minutes ago [-]
New thinking on physics... by a self-described neuroscientist. I think we already know how seriously to take this.
PaulHoule 38 minutes ago [-]
Practically stars are mostly burned out in another 50 billion years and radioisotopes that produce a heat gradient will also be mostly decayed by then. Eventually good tidal energy situations like
will end as well since this kind of situation changes the orbits. So energy for life and usable thermal gradients will disappear even if entropy will continue to increase for a long time -- for instance, black holes will be slowly inspiralling and crashing into each other resulting in huge entropy increases on paper.
thechao 20 minutes ago [-]
I've had plans for a sci-fi book I plan to never write that takes place in the ultra far future. The chapters' numbers would be the time dilation scale in a base 10 logarithm. The book would be made up of a series of short stories told from the point of view of a "time coast guard" rescuing idiots who refuse to time dilate from their creaking space hulks.
A later (set?) of chapters might just be in the 90+ scale; at that regime the characters can flit around the universe in the notional blink of an eye, even though their nanoships' velocity is only a few km/s. In my mind it'd be just a nuts-and-bolts 30's-style hard boiled detective story; but, set in the year 10^110.
Oh! Oh! And Charlie Stross would write this book for me, and it'd be a series.
HocusLocus 1 hours ago [-]
"Anything less than an infinite universe is a waste of space.
Anything less than an eternal universe is a waste of time."
~My Very Clever Dad. Miss you Dad.
delichon 21 minutes ago [-]
My space and time are finite but I treasure them anyway.
nathan_compton 2 hours ago [-]
I'm somewhat familiar with Barbour's work, which tries to reformulate gravity as a theory of 3-geometries instead of 4-geometries. Basically, you can do this by moving additional complexity into the lagrangian. Barbour's work is hard to get into because he has had various versions of this theory (Shape Dynamics) over the years and some of them are classical models, some are curved spacetime, some are more effective at being totally relational than others, etc.
Anyway, its true that something he calls the complexity increases forever in his more recent models, this is just an expression chosen to make the dynamics work out. Even Barbour says this is not necessarily related to the sort of complexity life has. And it depends on the universe being an open systems.
georgeburdell 58 minutes ago [-]
Sprinkling pop physicists like Paul Davies in between name dropping prominent historical physicists doesn’t make for a convincing article
andrewflnr 1 hours ago [-]
IANAP, but what I'm seeing here is a lot of very optimistic speculation about how life might survive, with no plausible mechanism. We have no idea what dark energy is, and it may well be impossible to extract energy from. Some of the quotes in the article suggest that life must physically go find additional energy sources, especially if dark energy doesn't work out. Interstellar travel is already prohibitively difficult, and getting to the next galaxy seems simply infeasible. Humanity's descendants are basically limited to the Milky Ways resources. Left to itself, the universe will eventually run out of hydrogen that can be economically fused. It will go dark eventually. The black hole power plants will eventually run out.
Wake me up when dark energy is more than a statistical anomaly, or we have a practical theory for a warp drive.
analog31 1 hours ago [-]
>>>>> Consciousness, creativity, love — all of these things are destined to disappear as the universe becomes increasingly disordered and dissolves into entropy.
Those are evolved traits, and it seems more likely that evolution will replace them with some other traits within a time frame that will be like the blink of an eye compared to the projected decay of the universe.
andrewflnr 58 minutes ago [-]
They evolved for pretty strong reasons that have been around a lot longer than a blink of an eye. Namely, collaboration and creativity are extremely good survival strategies.
lukateras 1 hours ago [-]
Timescape model, arguably less magical than ΛCDM, also makes heat death seem less certain. The ultimate conjecture of all. Humans surely love closure.
mistercow 1 hours ago [-]
> ... all believe that the universe is not destined to grow more disorganized forever, but more complex and rich with information.
Maybe it's just a problem of being loose with terminology, but this seems to be contrasting entropy and information content, which is backwards?
analog31 57 minutes ago [-]
Entropy also has units of measure: Joules per Kelvin.
daft_pink 1 hours ago [-]
If the laws of thermodynamics don’t apply does that mean we can build our perpetual motion machine?
andrewflnr 1 hours ago [-]
Just as soon as you figure out what dark energy is and how to extract work from it. Easy, right?
hungmung 1 hours ago [-]
Slightly tangential, but does anyone know of a good layman's book on thermodynamics? I'm interested in the science and the history of it, but I'm not really trying to do a deep dive into the math -- I wasn't bad in stats or calc but that was decades ago now and I haven't really used them since...
jzl 32 minutes ago [-]
“From Eternity To Here” by Sean Carroll has some nice discussions of it. He can be a bit much at times and could stand to have better editing (the book is 25% too long), but he does have some of the most approachable modern writing on physics out there. Lots of videos on YouTube as well.
crazygringo 1 hours ago [-]
Honestly, this is the type of stuff ChatGPT is really good at. Explaining overviews of a field, avoiding math if you want, focusing on concepts and explaining different schools of thought.
As long as you're sticking to the well-established stuff, it tends to be quite factually accurate. I think it's really underrated as a resource for good high-level overviews of fields where those overviews otherwise don't exist at all, are overly technical, or the existing overviews have a lot of author bias.
jzl 40 minutes ago [-]
Ugh, I couldn’t disagree more. Sure, LLMs can generate some really nice introductory summaries of topics. But, so far at least, they can’t even hold a candle to brilliantly written books and long form articles. Consider the classic book Cosmos. There is more insight into the universe in any few pages of that book than could be gathered by reading even a thousand ChatGPT results.
crazygringo 30 minutes ago [-]
You and I are talking about totally different things.
I'm talking about general overviews of topics, where a good book form at the level you're looking for often doesn't even exist.
You're talking about a classic book that is recognized as a great work.
Nobody's claiming that what ChatGPT outputs is Cosmos. And most books written by people aren't Cosmos either.
And most of the time when you want a basic factual introduction to a field that is at your level, neither too popular nor too technical, ChatGPT is really good at providing that.
Not everything has to be Cosmos.
Rendered at 18:08:10 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
I don't know, I'm human and humans tend to be social and interested in their own species? Is that weird? Does that not apply to you? Do you consider it petty and parochial to be more interested in one's own species? Are you "above" that?
If any bacteria or humans are interested in projecting the future of bacteria and their probability of surviving humanity, they should absolutely go for it.
Even if something from earth lived that long, it wouldn’t be human. It probably wouldn’t be remotely recognizable!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_heating_of_Io
will end as well since this kind of situation changes the orbits. So energy for life and usable thermal gradients will disappear even if entropy will continue to increase for a long time -- for instance, black holes will be slowly inspiralling and crashing into each other resulting in huge entropy increases on paper.
A later (set?) of chapters might just be in the 90+ scale; at that regime the characters can flit around the universe in the notional blink of an eye, even though their nanoships' velocity is only a few km/s. In my mind it'd be just a nuts-and-bolts 30's-style hard boiled detective story; but, set in the year 10^110.
Oh! Oh! And Charlie Stross would write this book for me, and it'd be a series.
Anything less than an eternal universe is a waste of time."
~My Very Clever Dad. Miss you Dad.
Anyway, its true that something he calls the complexity increases forever in his more recent models, this is just an expression chosen to make the dynamics work out. Even Barbour says this is not necessarily related to the sort of complexity life has. And it depends on the universe being an open systems.
Wake me up when dark energy is more than a statistical anomaly, or we have a practical theory for a warp drive.
Those are evolved traits, and it seems more likely that evolution will replace them with some other traits within a time frame that will be like the blink of an eye compared to the projected decay of the universe.
Maybe it's just a problem of being loose with terminology, but this seems to be contrasting entropy and information content, which is backwards?
As long as you're sticking to the well-established stuff, it tends to be quite factually accurate. I think it's really underrated as a resource for good high-level overviews of fields where those overviews otherwise don't exist at all, are overly technical, or the existing overviews have a lot of author bias.
I'm talking about general overviews of topics, where a good book form at the level you're looking for often doesn't even exist.
You're talking about a classic book that is recognized as a great work.
Nobody's claiming that what ChatGPT outputs is Cosmos. And most books written by people aren't Cosmos either.
And most of the time when you want a basic factual introduction to a field that is at your level, neither too popular nor too technical, ChatGPT is really good at providing that.
Not everything has to be Cosmos.