> But if the surrounding universe ever got too warm—too filled with thermal refuse—things would stagnate. Luckily we live in an expanding and constantly cooling

> But if the surrounding universe ever got too warm—too filled with thermal refuse—things would stagnate. Luckily we live in an expanding and constantly cooling cosmos. What better long-term investment by some hypothetical life 5 billion years ago than to get the universe to cool even faster? I'm not a physicist, but isn't that not how heat death works at all? Reducing temperature by spreading out matter doesn't help the "problem" that low-entropy energy becomes scarce.