TIMELAPSE OF THE FUTURE: A Journey to the End of Time (4K)

[Art Blade]

My position in the hive discussion was, it doesn't make sense to let worker or warrior ants have a consciousness in a way that they may start to ponder. They simply need to do their job, no thinking. The queen is the brain and breeder and everything else in a hive that needs managing. Whatever consciousness there may be in hives, it will be limited to a queen.

[Dweller_Benthos]

OK now I'm confused..... lol

[Art Blade]

 

[fragger]

Honestly, I've never been entirely sold on the Big Bang theory. The key word there is "theory" - even after all this time, a theory is still all it is. It's just the best one we have at present for explaining why the universe appears to be expanding. But that doesn't make it the unassailable truth.

The core idea presented here is that the expanding universe is essentially spherical in shape, but what if it actually isn't? Since the universe is sometimes referred to as a "Unified Field", perhaps that "field" is toroidal or donut-shaped, just as all energetic/electronmagnetic fields are. What if there is no actual center to the universe and the background radiation and Doppler spectral shifts that currently provide the yardsticks for measuring the expansion are, in fact, erroneously construed on our part? Maybe instead of continually expanding, the universe is a torus that is continually turning itself inside-out, like a smoke-ring, with some kind of wormhole situation going on at the centre. This "turning-inside-out" action is basically how all magnetic fields operate, so why could it not apply to the universe as a whole? In which case, there would be no expansion or contraction - just a constant round-and-round, with stuff falling "into" the donut's hole from one side even while newly-created stuff is being ejected from the other, so that the universe is in fact continually recycling itself. Why can't we see this happening? Maybe because of "cosmic censorship" - just as we can't see into a black hole, spacetime factors prevent us from seeing the donut's centre. Or it could be that the universe is just too vast for us to know where this centre may lie (after all, even the Big Bang proponents can't tell anyone where the universe's "centre" may be, since no matter where you are in a uniformly-expanding universe, everything appears to be receding from you. So one suggestion is as valid as the other in that regard, imo).

It has been said that the universe is stranger than we can imagine. It could be that the Big Bang theory is in fact flawed or incorrect. There may be processes at w0#k of which we still know nothing that may be erroneously influencing our conclusions. Who knows.

Great video though, if still largely speculative.

[Art Blade]

I like the video for its audio-visual impact. And it's an interesting theory, too.

Regarding the big bang, I remember my "first contact" with it in shape of a small book that explained the theory. I remember that the idea was both overwhelming and not entirely convincing. I've learned first hand that there are things out there that cannot be explained. You may see, feel, hear, experience them but you still cannot explain them. That's when in my opinion humankind tries to either blame it on a divine entity (like, "it's God's will..") or tries to explain it by comparing it to things they know (like, "a big bang..") but they never, ever accept things just the way they are. I believe some things are just beyond our grasp, beyond explaining yet still not divine. Just some kind of nature, even if it freaks us out. I can live with the inexplicable and accept it as it is

[Dweller_Benthos]

What Fragger is talking about sounds like the old "steady state" theory that the universe would hit / had hit a state of uniform distribution and will just sit there like that, forever. A constantly circulating torus shaped universe is about as steady state as you can get. The reason the big bang theory and the constantly expanding universe has gained traction is, I think, the arrival of new information and new observations about what the universe is doing and what it contains, or doesn't contain, as the case may be. This is where dark matter and dark energy come in, things we can't see, can't detect, but must be there or the other things in the universe wouldn't be the way they are because there isn't enough mass and energy to make the universe what it is that we see today.

Or something like that.

One thing I was thinking on was if there's matter, and there's anti-matter, which I think they've pretty much proven the existence of, if I'm not mistaken, then according to Einstein's equation, E=MC2, where matter essentially equals energy, of there's anti-matter, there must also be anti-energy. And since space and time co-exist with matter and energy, is there also anti-space and anti-time? Seems to only follow, you know? So if there is anti-time, what would it be? Reverse time? Or a time that runs the opposite to our own? Time travel anyone? Not sure what anti-space would look like though, and it doesn't sound comfortable if you had to go there to travel in time, seems you'd be turned inside out or something.

[BinnZ]

Interesting thoughts gentlemen!

The first time I heard from the big bang theory I thought of it as not so important. At least not important whether it is true or not. I was a kid back then, and for some reason I was very impressed by the idea that there's no end to things. Infinity. I mean that if there's a big bang, that can only explain the stuff close to us. Close of course is relatively speaking. I mean everything we see and assume since we see evidence of it. In my brain, the big bang was just another star-like appearance (or galaxy if you will) which is one of many many other big bangs in a bigger thing. The idea of a something, which is the universe in the case, surrounded by endless nothingness just doesn't fit, in my logic.

I like your idea of a donut, fragger, that might actually be a good point. Imagine it to be an actual smoke-ring, provoked by something even bigger. The idea struck me because it relies on simple mathematical logic and forms. We see those forms appear on any level of size. That makes me think that the key to existence is probably more shape-ish than matter-ish.
Maybe the ultimate clue is there's not just matter, energy and space-time, but there is just form and shape. The clue to life is Art!

[Art Blade]

I know!

Oh. Maybe not with a capital A.

[BinnZ]

 

[Art Blade]

Honestly, I've never been entirely sold on the Big Bang theory

that and the rest you said in that post: I highly recommend the following vid to give everyone a nice insight using "common language" so we actually understand that stuff. An American scientist and an Australian scientist married and together they explain the universe and the dark stuff to us in a quite entertaining way.