Timeline for Certainty for the existence of tomorrow?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 23 at 14:58 | comment | added | Alistair Riddoch | @Howwhye ... THEN under those conditions, I would suggest... I don't concede to "we dont know". I might, but cannot claim necessarily so. There's a difference. I will suggest there is not a more plausible suggestion regarding the composition of reality. | |
| May 23 at 14:56 | comment | added | Alistair Riddoch | @Howwhye Yes. But. That I may be wrong is why I don't push it as a reason to expect a tomorrow. Going with "we are all on Earth and along for the ride" and that "history, billions of years of evidence, leads to the conclusion of consistency and persistency". AND also not it is noteable that... the origins of doomsday scenarios and the bulk of the ones made have been religious in nature and based on unknowns, rather than any evidence of anything of the sort being impending...... AND... only if insisting that because "we" don't know, we should entertain the "possibility"... then... | |
| May 23 at 13:52 | comment | added | user6527 | There is a big difference between "we have no reason to think there won't be a tomorrow" and "we are 100% certain that there will be a tomorrow". This answer does not answer the philosophical question, just the common sense practical question, but they are not the same thing either. | |
| May 23 at 13:32 | comment | added | How why e | @AlistairRiddoch I don't know what you mean if you are right about reality if you are talking about your theory then your theory must bring forth the grand unification theory and explain every observation including dark matter and dark energy, it also must deal with the quantization of space and time and how that fits into the bigger picture of current quantum mechanics conceptions and also must be able to unite relativity and quantum mechanics all these should be met before one supposes one is right about reality! | |
| May 23 at 13:15 | comment | added | Alistair Riddoch | @Howwhye Yes... comes down to nature of fundamental reality. I expect we will determine that "energy" is actually physically embodied. And that the mechanical host is composed of immutable individual components... which are therefor timeless. Then we will know that no rip cometh. If we confirm final knowledge of fundamental reality, we can draw firm conclusions about such things. I might be wrong, but expect not. The upside is, if I am right about reality, then I am right about the absence of impending doom. Cheers. A. | |
| May 23 at 13:12 | comment | added | Alistair Riddoch | @Howwhye Academic exercises are okely dokely... its a common theme within the fabric of society. an entire genre of movies. Note that Polaris is arbitrary, and simply stands as the current almost-heading of the solar system.. it changes over time. it is just the temporary... "whats at the end of the tunnel that depicts Earth's future travel plans. | |
| May 23 at 11:30 | comment | added | How why e | @AlistairRiddoch ....thus with the possibility of a hypothetical tear all around space simultaneously and instantly the existence of the display of these other stars and Polaris will mean nothing. | |
| May 23 at 11:27 | comment | added | How why e | @AlistairRiddoch It seems to me that you point out Polaris but I want to say that the light we receive from that star doesn't mean a thing, we are looking at the 'Polaris' from the Past most of the stars we see are not in their current states, so the existence of their lights doesn't mean a ton. A lot of light years away. I also want to add that we use the concept of space-time as a 'fabric' but don't know anything about its properties and why it expands, don't know anything about dark energy/cosmological constant that is causing the expansion.... | |
| May 23 at 11:16 | comment | added | How why e | @AlistairRiddoch I want to make it clear I am no doomsayer of any sorts and my question itself doesn't intentionally set an accurate date or anything like that of any sorts, if you can see I am literally establishing a completely arbitrary point in time in my question i.e., even down to a picosecond and I want you to understand that this was a complete thought experiment to show that we truly don't know a lot of things down to the basics of fundamental reality and a lot of it is assumption that seems to be very consistent but might not be forever, not necessarily, we just don't know | |
| May 23 at 10:33 | comment | added | Scott Rowe | Quote from linked Wikipedia article: "Polls conducted in 2012 across 20 countries found over 14% of people believe the world will end in their lifetime, with percentages ranging from 6% of people in France to 22% in the US and Turkey. Belief in the apocalypse is observed to be most prevalent in people with lower rates of education, lower household incomes, and those under the age of 35. In the UK in 2015, 23% of the general public believed the apocalypse was likely to occur in their lifetime, compared to 10% of experts from the Global Challenges Foundation." | |
| May 23 at 9:08 | history | edited | Alistair Riddoch | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 609 characters in body
|
| May 23 at 8:57 | comment | added | Alistair Riddoch | @Howwhye en.wikipedia.org/wiki/… ... which is why we need to be extra skeptical if our thoughts drift in such a direction. (again, this is my suggestion). | |
| May 23 at 8:56 | comment | added | Alistair Riddoch | @Howwhye if you look at the history of predictions of doom (theres a list on wikipedia)... you notice predictions tend to be closely related to the duration of existence of the claimant. Ignoring the arbitrariness of their existence within time. Showing their fears to be largely ego driven / self-referential. If we imagine an unravelling of reality might occur in 46 trillion years.. it might be objective. If we fear reality unravelling next Tuesday, or anytime within our brief flash of existence... it is likely we are being ego-biased. I suggest. | |
| May 23 at 8:48 | comment | added | Alistair Riddoch | @Howwhye It seems to me (this doesn't make it a "necessarily so" claim)... that we have observations of billions of years of information of "consistent similar progression of events" where situations parallel ours.... meaning... within the aged/ageable observations of celestial events... nothing screams "That place acted way differently than that other place"... everything seems to point to a consistent predictable progression... billions of years worth. So we don't have to appeal to faith or trust... we can appeal to "cohesion with billions of years of observation". I suggest. | |
| May 23 at 1:05 | comment | added | How why e | +1 I understand what you are saying and I know how you are cosmologically explaining that the existence of Earth through time and space is very imminent and that we have a solid understanding so we know, but my question is on a ontological and metaphysical level, I am asking just like how the big bang occurred and the universe unfolded according to the laws of nature what if the laws of nature and space break down or simply stop existing at any point. The very fabric of space and time tear or just stopped 'being'. | |
| May 20 at 4:51 | comment | added | Alistair Riddoch | @ScottRowe I think "used to" and that we caught up. We have gained a lot of weight since I was born (not that I personally have much responsibility for that)... but we've gone from 3 million to 8 million. Ants haven't changed much. And I think we about equal them now. Trees are the real winners, mass wise. But all of the above... are "along for the ride". Really Earth wins by such a margin that nuttin else much matters. | |
| May 20 at 0:56 | comment | added | Scott Rowe | Right, but ants vastly outmass humans also. | |
| May 19 at 20:09 | history | answered | Alistair Riddoch | CC BY-SA 4.0 |