[HN Gopher] Eventually everything will evaporate, not only black...
___________________________________________________________________
Eventually everything will evaporate, not only black holes
Author : geox
Score : 45 points
Date : 2023-06-02 17:33 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.ru.nl)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.ru.nl)
| roywiggins wrote:
| Here's a link to the actual paper, which for some reason this
| press release neglected to link.
|
| https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.13...
| anticensor wrote:
| Press tends to avoid referring to primary sources directly.
| ThomPete wrote:
| Unless we can control it the black holes at that time.
| jenadine wrote:
| I don't understand this explanation of Hawkins radiation:
|
| > A particle and its anti-particle are created very briefly from
| the quantum field, after which they immediately annihilate. But
| sometimes a particle falls into the black hole, and then the
| other particle can escape
|
| Is it not equally likely that an anti particle falls into the
| black hole than a normal particle? Why is there evaporation?
| kabdib wrote:
| That's the popular explanation, and yes, it's incorrect.
|
| What's really going on is more deeply rooted in some esoterica
| of General Relativity, where it _does_ make sense. I don 't
| pretend to understand it.
| treprinum wrote:
| We have no clue what is going to happen in billions of years. We
| are just extrapolating some known local parameters over a time
| span we can't directly observe.
| Buttons840 wrote:
| This reminds me of Wikipedia's Timeline of the Far Future (and
| they do mean _far_ ).
|
| [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_far_future
| alex_suzuki wrote:
| What a fascinating document! I understand only bits and pieces
| bit it's weirdly satisfying nonetheless.
| wanderingstan wrote:
| I discovered it in 2020 when it seemed the world really was
| falling apart, and agree that it was strangely calming to
| think about such huge timescales.
| ftxbro wrote:
| > "Around this vast timeframe, quantum tunnelling in any
| isolated patch of the universe could generate new inflationary
| events, resulting in new Big Bangs giving birth to new
| universes."
|
| it's ok guys we will get new universes
| arp242 wrote:
| That will take 10^10^10^56 years.
|
| There are about 10^50 atoms on earth, and about about 10^82
| atoms in the observable universe. There aren't nearly enough
| atoms in the universe to store the number written out in
| full.
|
| 1/10: terrible delivery time.
| ftxbro wrote:
| i'm not an expert in inflationary events but i assume they
| would be outside of our 'light cone' anyway
| arp242 wrote:
| So not only will delivery take forever it will also be
| delivered at the wrong address? Seems like some things
| will never change...
| kabdib wrote:
| ... and when it finally arrives, the box will be empty.
| :-)
|
| The universe is a funny mix of the ultimate free lunch
| and just getting reamed by entropy and expansion. I wish
| it would make up its mind.
| extr0pian wrote:
| Super interesting. This far future allows for highly improbable
| events to occure, like the formation of Boltzmann brains.
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boltzmann_brain
| triyambakam wrote:
| Sounds like Mahapralaya in Hinduism. It means the great
| dissolution where the universe dissolves back into... whatever
| you want to call it. Hindus call it God but you could equally
| think of it as nothingness.
| raattgift wrote:
| I prefer (and submitted) the summary of this work at
| https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/hawking-radiation-bl...
| which also has the advantage of linking to the arxiv preprint
| https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.18521 unlike this terse and not-very-
| enlightening press release by the authors' institution.
| JumpinJack_Cash wrote:
| Time to sell all the stocks! :)
| chromoblob wrote:
| to who
| sesm wrote:
| Note that inflationary cosmology model this article is based on,
| is having a big crisis now, because it struggles to explain
| galaxy formation in early universe that is currently observed by
| JWST.
|
| However, cyclical cosmology model recently got a good theoretical
| basis in the works of Nick Gorkavyi. He found a mechanism for
| expansion-collapse cycles that is purely based on General
| Relativity without any quantum gravity theory.
|
| If you are interested, here are the papers:
|
| https://pos.sissa.it/335/039/
|
| https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/476/1/1384/4848298
|
| https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/461/3/2929/2608669
|
| https://arxiv.org/abs/2110.10218
|
| https://www.sao.ru/Doc-k8/Science/Public/Bulletin/Vol76/N3/A...
| m3kw9 wrote:
| What? So we not coming back, it will be forever? It's cool that
| think about what forever feels like after we are gone
| adityaathalye wrote:
| This stunning video / visualisation features the evaporation of
| everything. Ultimately everything cools to absolute zero. Time
| becomes meaningless.
|
| Timelapse of the Future: A Journey to the End of Time
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uD4izuDMUQA
|
| edit: discussed previously here:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33046171
| meroes wrote:
| Things still happen in heat death because of quantum mechanics
| and fluctuations. Time still has a meaning, but it may lose its
| arrow if microscopic quantum interactions are what dominates.
| At a small scale, these have no direction in time. The
| direction is macroscopic.
|
| My favorite semi related video on this is Susskind's: Why is
| time a one way street?
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhnKBKZvb_U&t=600s (YouTube)
| It's a one way street because the multiverse makes observer
| moments like ours (ones not in heat death like Boltzmann
| brains) a common state of affairs. That is unachievable in our
| universe because of infinite heat death. Something must exist
| outside of our universe (other universes) to offset the future
| of our universe where Boltzmann brains will dominate the class
| of observers. If infinite in time heat death with fluctuations
| is our universe's fate, that we are not Boltzmann brains is
| secured by a multiverse which makes many more universes not in
| heat death which outpace the ones in heat death. Yes BB's
| really are a problem to modern physics/cosmology, and one way
| out is a multiverse where many many more universes are spawned
| (and non-degenerate ones) by the time one is in heat death.
| passion__desire wrote:
| Sean Carroll disagrees wrt Boltzmann brains will dominate the
| class of observers.
|
| https://youtu.be/nqQrGk7Vzd4?t=2614
| meroes wrote:
| That's because he disagrees with mainstream cosmology
| models in a different way than Susskind. Susskind takes the
| cosmology of our bubble universe as more settled, but
| addendums a huge inflationary multiverse on top. I'm pretty
| sure Carroll disagrees with the cosmology model of our
| bubble universe, and uses that to rule out BB's dominating
| instead. Susskind's says BB's dominate any single universe
| over time, but not the multiverse as a whole.
| pixl97 wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conformal_cyclic_cosmology
|
| If everything but what exists at the quantum level then CCC
| is a possibility.
| meroes wrote:
| I'm petty sure this is loosely agreed by Susskind except
| CCC is a more specific version. Entire bubble universes
| have a chance to fluctuate out of any patch of spacetime.
| (Colemann-Delucca process or something). That fractal
| nature of spacetime is appealed to by Susskind in the
| video.
| benlivengood wrote:
| There's also the branches of our multiverse where we simply
| don't experience heat death due to being on the unlikely side
| of the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Infinite simulations in
| those branches could account for a lot of "normal"
| experience. I haven't done the math but it seems intuitively
| like a simulation that keeps running in 10^-M branches
| (effectively quantum immortality) due to avoidance of entropy
| increase are more frequent than the 10^-N occurrence of
| boltzman brains where N>>M.
| red75prime wrote:
| Given that decoherence is not perfect, I'd expect those
| branches to lack the "normal" macroscopic structure and
| maybe the time arrow as they interfere with each other.
| adhesive_wombat wrote:
| Melodysheep in general is just amazing, both for the Symphony
| of Science remixes (and film/TV ones) and the more recent
| science-y videos.
|
| The Museum of Alien Life is stunning and reminds me of a sci-fi
| Encarta MindMaze.
|
| https://youtube.com/watch?v=ThDYazipjSI
| Hendrikto wrote:
| Cool to see Radboud university on the front page. It was my alma
| mater for both my bachelor's and master's degrees.
| pram wrote:
| That's what we get for living in a giant explosion. Who thought
| this was a good idea?
| awelxtr wrote:
| Wasn't it widely regarded as a bad move?
| patrickdavey wrote:
| I thought that was coming down from the trees? And didn't
| some people think even the trees were a mistake?
| lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote:
| I believe they're referring to _Hitchhiker 's Guide to the
| Galaxy_. It's kind of an iconic line for those who have
| read it because of how it sets the tone of the book: "In
| the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot
| of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad
| move."
|
| https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/1-the-story-so-far-in-
| the-b...
| AndrewKemendo wrote:
| Right? Feels like there has to be a better way to do this
| anticensor wrote:
| That one requires getting it right at the first time, unlike
| this one.
| beerpls wrote:
| I have to assume through some form of leptogensis or similar that
| we could engineer our galaxies or maybe entire universe so that
| this feature is at least delayed much longer, if not avoided
| entirely
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-06-02 23:01 UTC)