6 ms·

Relevant Timeline of far future from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_far_future http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_far_future

by z92 13y ago

Relevant Timeline of far future from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_far_future http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_far_future To me the most interesting point in the future is 120 trillion years: when all the stars in the universe have exhausted their fuel, and the Universe has gone dark.

coldtea 13y ago
>To me the most interesting point in the future is 120 trillion years: when all the stars in the universe have exhausted their fuel, and the Universe has gone dark. Sorry, but doesn't that sound like the LEAST interesting point in the universe?
- iliis 13y ago
  Well, you may never have read Asimov's "Last Question": http://filer.case.edu/dts8/thelastq.htm http://filer.case.edu/dts8/thelastq.htm
  - shijie 13y ago
    I have somehow never read that. It was stunning in its breadth. I loved it. It made me ponder the significance of the series of self-perpetuating chemical reactions that comprises my biological existence. Now I'm sitting here at my computer, waxing existential, when I'm supposed to be building the auth and permissions section for an API...
  - padobson 13y ago
    [SPOILER] If he was going to invoke a biblical narrative where an infinite number of immortal humans, having evolved past the need for their material bodies, merge into a single, ultra-creative consciousness, he could have at least tipped his cap to the duality of the nature of man and had a large number of those minds (1/3 for maximum compatibility with the biblical narrative) reject cohesion with the singular consciousness and descend into the chaos to fuel its contrarian existence to the ultimate plan of the universe. [/SPOILER] Or, you know, whatever.
  - coldtea 13y ago
    I've actually read it many times. How does a fictional story becomes an argument about the heat death of the universe being "interesting"? You expect the same things as in the story to happen then?

by z92 13y ago

coldtea 13y ago

>To me the most interesting point in the future is 120 trillion years: when all the stars in the universe have exhausted their fuel, and the Universe has gone dark. Sorry, but doesn't that sound like the LEAST interesting point in the universe?

iliis 13y ago
Well, you may never have read Asimov's "Last Question": http://filer.case.edu/dts8/thelastq.htm http://filer.case.edu/dts8/thelastq.htm
- shijie 13y ago
  I have somehow never read that. It was stunning in its breadth. I loved it. It made me ponder the significance of the series of self-perpetuating chemical reactions that comprises my biological existence. Now I'm sitting here at my computer, waxing existential, when I'm supposed to be building the auth and permissions section for an API...
- padobson 13y ago
  [SPOILER] If he was going to invoke a biblical narrative where an infinite number of immortal humans, having evolved past the need for their material bodies, merge into a single, ultra-creative consciousness, he could have at least tipped his cap to the duality of the nature of man and had a large number of those minds (1/3 for maximum compatibility with the biblical narrative) reject cohesion with the singular consciousness and descend into the chaos to fuel its contrarian existence to the ultimate plan of the universe. [/SPOILER] Or, you know, whatever.
- coldtea 13y ago
  I've actually read it many times. How does a fictional story becomes an argument about the heat death of the universe being "interesting"? You expect the same things as in the story to happen then?