[FRIAM] Too much later, and we wouldn't be able to know that there's a universe at all

[Robert Cordingley]

I have two questions:
    Relative to the age of a universe, how wide is the time frame in 
which life can emerge to realize it's at a special time in the universe?
and
    What makes one think that the science and technology we would have 
available in 100 billion years will be limited to the science we have 
today that sees the limitations described?  Perhaps by then we will have 
mastered transdimensional travel.  It reminds me of the sentiment, not 
too long ago, before relativity, that claimed all the physics there was 
had been discovered.  But then I didn't pay the $32 to read the original 
paper.

Robert C.

Douglas Roberts wrote:
> Hey,
>
> If you guys want something really complex to wax philosophical about, 
> try this:
>
> http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070629-the-universe-will-destroy-the-evidence-of-its-origin.html 
> <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070629-the-universe-will-destroy-the-evidence-of-its-origin.html>
>
> Exerpt:
>
> [...] there's another layer of complexity on top of that, namely that 
> we only recognize that there is an anthropic principle because we came 
> along at the right time.
>
>
> -- 
> Doug Roberts, RTI International
> droberts at rti.org <mailto:droberts at rti.org>
> doug at parrot-farm.net <mailto:doug at parrot-farm.net>
> 505-455-7333 - Office
> 505-670-8195 - Cell
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20070701/62394649/attachment.html