The Big Rip

[Thomas Knierim]

Let's populate the new 'science' forum... I thought you might find this interesting.

----- The Big Rip -----

A rather harrowing new theory about the death of the universe paints a picture of "phantom energy" ripping apart galaxies, stars, planets and eventually every speck of matter in a fantastical end to time.

Scientifically it is just about the most repulsive notion ever conceived.

The speculative but serious cosmology is described as a "pretty fantastic possibility" even by its lead author, Robert Caldwell of Dartmouth University. It explains one possible outcome for solid astronomical observations made in the late 1990s -- that the universe is expanding at an ever-increasing pace, and that something unknown is vacuuming everything outward.

The question Caldwell and his colleagues posed is, what would happen if the rate of acceleration increased?

Their answer is that the eventual, phenomenal pace would overwhelm the normal, trusted effects of gravity right down to the local level. Even the nuclear forces that bind things in the subatomic world will cease to be effective.

"The expansion becomes so fast that it literally rips apart all bound objects," Caldwell explained in a telephone interview. "It rips apart clusters of galaxies. It rips apart stars. It rips apart planets and solar systems. And it eventually rips apart all matter."

He calls it, as you might guess, the Big Rip.

The standard view

Driving the known acceleration of the universe's expansion is a mysterious thing is called dark energy, thought of by scientists as anti-gravity working over large distances.

Conventional wisdom holds that the acceleration will proceed at a constant rate, akin to a car that moves 10 mph faster with each mile traveled. With nothing to cap the acceleration, all galaxies will eventually recede from one another at the speed of light, leaving each galaxy alone in a cold, dark universe within 100 billion years. We would not be able to see any galaxies outside our Milky Way, even with the most powerful telescopes.

That's the conventional view, remarkable as it sounds. The Big Rip theory has dark energy's prowess increasing with time, until it's an out-of-control phantom energy. Think of our car accelerating an additional 10 mph every half mile, then every hundred yards, then every foot.

Before long, the bumpers are bound to fly off. Sooner or later, our hypothetical engine will come apart, regardless of how much we spend on motor oil.

Countdown to demise

Other theorists who have reviewed the Big Rip theory are not yet sold on the idea. Meanwhile, Caldwell's team has provided a precise countdown to total demise. The projected end is, reassuringly, 20 billion years away. If our species survives the next 19 billion years (and there are serious doubts about this, given our Sun's projected fate) here are some signs that scientists of the future will want to look for.

A billion years before the end, all galaxies will have receded so far and so fast from our own as to be erased from the sky, as in no longer visible.

When the Milky Way begins to fly apart, there are 60 million years left.

Planets in our solar system will start to wing away from the Sun three months before the end of time.

When Earth explodes, the end is momentarily near.

At this point, there is still a short interval before atoms and even their nuclei break apart. "There's about 30 minutes left," Caldwell said, "But it's not quality time."

And then what? Does the universe recycle itself? Is there something after nothing?

"We're not sure what happens after that," Caldwell says. "On the face of it, it would look like time ends."

The first explosion

Caldwell's study had humble beginnings. He and his colleagues, Marc Kamionkowski and Nevin Weinberg at Caltech, were considering how a sphere of matter collapses under its own weight to form a galaxy. In computer models, they tweaked with the dark energy factor and found that too much of it would actually prevent the sphere from collapsing. In extreme cases, the sphere exploded.

"That was our hint that there was something really unusual going on," Caldwell said.

It wasn't long ago, just before the accelerated expansion was discovered, that many cosmologists believed the universe might reverse course, that normal gravity would win, and that everything would fall back in a Big Crunch. More recently, solid observational data has all but assured the infinite-expansion model and the cold, dark, never-ending end.

The Caldwell group decided there might be a third possibility, leading to their new paper, which has been submitted to the Physical Review.

But there are many unknowns. It is not clear if the dark energy driving expansion is a force not currently described by physics, or if it is merely a different manifestation of gravity over huge distances. The repulsion could be a response to dark matter, unseen stuff that is known to comprise 23 percent of the universe, based on firm observations.

Dark matter has unknown properties, and it may be related to dark energy, Caldwell said. He notes that even Einstein considered that gravity might work repulsively, in a manner consistent with his theory of general relativity.

Dark energy, being quantified only recently, tends to be discussed as some strange new force, in addition to the four fundamental forces: gravity, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear forces that govern atoms. But the repulsion is possibly just the way gravity behaves in the presence of dark energy, Caldwell said. In that sense, it is not a new force.

Cautious reception

To turn dark energy into destructive phantom energy, Caldwell and his colleagues had to play around with a thing called the cosmological constant, a mathematical fix that Einstein applied to general relativity. Einstein later called it his greatest mistake, when Edwin Hubble found in the 1920s that the universe was expanding (seven decades later, that expansion would be seen accelerating).

The cosmological constant has been recently revived. Attempts to describe dark energy differ in how the density of dark energy varies with time. In some models, the density decreases slowly. For the cosmological constant, the density is a constant. For phantom energy, it must grow with time.
"We considered a more exotic form of dark energy which was more repulsive," as Caldwell explains is.

Abraham Loeb, a theoretician at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, has quantified the lonely effects of a forever-expanding universe. Loeb stands by that scenario, but he said Caldwell's idea is nonetheless interesting to explore.

"I think it's a logical possibility," Loeb told SPACE.com. But he cautioned that altering the cosmological constant goes against current consensus.

"If I had to place a bet, I would bet in favor of the standard cosmological constant," Loeb said.

Sci-fi to reality

If Caldwell's team is right, cosmology would undergo a revolution. Sci-fi ideas like wormholes and time travel might suddenly enter the realm of hard science. All of this could sort itself out pretty soon, Caldwell believes. Observations over the next few years may actually show whether his phantom energy is possible.

"Who knows if it is right or wrong," Caldwell said of his theory. "I think we'll find out pretty soon."

In fact, recent observations from NASA's WMAP space probe have pinned down the physics of the universe with surprising accuracy. A little wiggle room remains for the cosmological constant. Yet more WMAP data are expected over the next four years. Other missions, including one called the Supernova Acceleration Probe (SNAP), could provide answers, Caldwell said.

Even if the Big Rip is a big bust, there's no guarantee of a pleasant ending.

Alternate final chapter

Paul Steinhardt, a Princeton University physicist, is, like Caldwell and Loeb, no stranger to strange ideas. Steinhardt advocates a cyclical universe, one that has no beginning or end but which instead is constantly starting over again.
Steinhardt theorizes within the generally accepted standards of the cosmological constant. He said the Big Rip is more exotic than most ideas but still conceivable, a projected possible result that is "straightforward and obvious for cosmologists."

Yet there is another entirely different possibility for the final moments of time as we know it.

In a theory put forth two years ago by Steinhardt and his colleagues, our universe is but a membrane, or brane, floating in a five-dimensional space. It is destined to collide dramatically with another brane. The idea, labeled the Ekpyrotic Universe, would replace portions of the Big Bang scenario while sticking to the presently accepted estimates of acceleration.

"Lest you get too optimistic, galaxies are destroyed in a far more violent way," Steinhardt said of the brane scenario. "They are vaporized at the next 'bang' -- the collision between branes … so, you either rip them apart or you vaporize them."

By Robert Roy Britt
Senior Science Write, www.space.com
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/big_...rip_030306.html (http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/big_rip_030306.html)

[rich]

Dear Thomas,

Very interesting reading. Do not think I will need to worry about that one, though there are other things. Or are there? Nothing I can do anyway, why worry? :unsure: :blink:

[Polaris]

:o Not to say that it is impossible, since I really don't know, just that it doesn't seem to jive with what we already are suppose to know about the Universe. In order for there to be another force large enough to make us suddenly speed up wouldn't we need another "Big Bang" type of cataclysmic event? Assuming that the Universe as we know it was created in such an event and that we are expanding at a constant rate, and if the Universe is infinite then isn't it more likely that if a Big Bang could have happened here, in our Universe that some place beyond the confines of our expanding universe another similar Big Bang might have occured and that universes might eventually collide?

It explains one possible outcome for solid astronomical observations made in the late 1990s -- that the universe is expanding at an ever-increasing pace, and that something unknown is vacuuming everything outward.

I'm obviously not a physicist but are we being vacuumed outward or have we been thrust outward leaving a vacuum behind us such as you see in those flim clips of nuclear bomb testing when the explosion forces everything outwards leaving a vacuum behind. Then once the matter has expanded as far as it could go, THEN it is vacuumed back in to Ground Zero. :blink: Oh well, that's how it works on Earth, isn't it? Blow it out... suck in in.

And if it has been discovered that our expansion is speeding up, wouldn't it be possible or at least just as possible that the matter ahead of us and perhaps some around us is actually slowly down because a lessening of momentum. Some matter may slow before others so it only looks like the others are speeding up. Maybe what these guys are witnessing it the beginning of the turn around of the Big Bang. The time when the Universe begins to slow down, lose momentum and get sucked back in.

[rich]

An Observation: :blink: The older you get, the faster time goes. :lol:

[sahyo]

like breathing no where
zero not zero

[dog goddess]

blah blah blah blah


to bad it's the universe expanding and not mother earth considering the way humans like to breed.


as for everything being ripped apart, well, at least we won't suffer.

[Thomas Knierim]

I think it is remarkable that Mr. Britt calls the theory "harrowing". He even says it is "the most repulsive notion ever conceived." Funny. I happen to think the opposite. I find the idea quite fascinating. The universe being torn apart by an accelerating anti-gravitational force. Wow. What a dramatic ending. Einstein's cosmological constant strikes back with vengeance. The idea is infinitely more attractive than the "open universe" scenario supported by mainstream cosmology, in which the universe expands forever and ultimately becomes an ocean of low-energy radiation.

I must confess that I am inclined to prefer a cyclic view of the universe. Everything that lives must die. Everything that comes into existence must go out of existence. The "Big Crunch" scenario offered such a cyclic possibility for some time, but in view of the recent cosmological data it became increasingly untenable. However, the recent observation of an anti-gravitational force, is nothing short of a revolutionary discovery. At this time, nobody can say for sure whether the Big Rip theory is accurate, but the discovery of dark energy will definitely change our understanding of the universe. It's a landmark discovery.

The article already hinted that the discovery is in part based on the evaluation of cosmic background radiation data that was gathered by the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) only last year (WMAP is the successor of the early 90's COBE satellite). A few years ago I thought that the COBE data was exciting, but the WMAP data (map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_mm.html) is outrageous by comparison; it left me gasping for air.

The results of the MA probe?

(1) The universe is 13.7 billion years old.
(2) First stars started forming 200 Ma after BB, not 300 Ma as previously supposed.
(3) The gemoetry of the Universe is flat!!! (Hello Euclid!)
(4) Inflation theory is corroborated.
(5) Hubble "constant" pinned down to Ho= 71 km/sec/Mpc (5% error margin).

As if that was not enough, the WMAP also led to the discovery of a new "dark energy" that is thought to be responsible for the expansion of the universe. This dark energy makes up a whopping 73% of the universe, followed by dark matter (which has been known previously) making up 23% percent, leaving only 4% for conventional matter composed of atoms. The Big Rip theory is based on the conjecture that the expansion of the universe accelerates, which seems more likely after the recent quantification of the repulsive force. This would mean that the Hubble constant isn't really a constant - it just seems so at the moment. Einstein would have loved that!

Polaris: ...if a Big Bang could have happened here, in our Universe that some place beyond the confines of our expanding universe another similar Big Bang might have occured and that universes might eventually collide?

Yes, that is considered a possibility by some scientists. It is called the brane hypothesis. The brane hypothesis is an expansion of the M-theory. I must say I don't like it very much. What I find odd is that M-theory requires eleven spacetime dimensions while branes need only five dimensions, and the fifth brane dimension is unrelated to any of the string dimensions. Apart from that, the brane hypothesis circumvents the inflation model for which WMAP delivered some good evidence. Inflation theory is based on the relatively well established Quantum Field theory. Another argument against branes is the problem of collisions. If there were brane collisions, as pictured by brane hypothesis, it would seem necessary for the colliding universes to suffer changes in their geometry. Spacetime would sort of wrinkle. However, spacetime in our universe is flat. So, M-theory is still a very possible solution, but perhaps one should forget about the branes.

Some matter may slow before others so it only looks like the others are speeding up. Maybe what these guys are witnessing it the beginning of the turn around of the Big Bang. The time when the Universe begins to slow down, lose momentum and get sucked back in.

This is basically the "Big Crunch" hypothesis (see above) that was developed earlier in the 80ties until it became obvious that the amount of matter in the universe, or its gravitational force, is insufficient to halt expansion. The actual/critical mass coefficient is known as Omega, so the hypothetical future of the universe was once known as the Omega question. Is the arrow of time is reversed in a contracting universe? That question could never be solved. Anyway, the hypothesis now seems to be invalidated.

Cheers, Thomas

[Polaris]

It's too much stuff. Too big a space. Too much unknown. Too much speculation. :blink:

It's hard to invalidate a hypothesis by using another hypothesis. :)

[sahyo]

Too much speculation.*
:blink:


yes only speculation :D

[vicente]

The "big rip" doesn't fit my understanding of actual cosmology, which appears quite in balance. To me, if there was the slightest unbalance, it would take a fraction of a second to end the phenomal universe, not 60 million years.

From my observations, I see nature, whether a speck of sand on a Goa beach, or a massive planets orbiting around the sun like the orbital distribution of electrons within an atom, as part of a dualistic balance,...a seesaw, between centipetal, spiral-in and centifugal, spiral-out motion.

If the female expansion was ever to separate from the male contraction, yes, there would be a big rip,...instantaneously.

Simply observe thermodynamics. Cold compresses, that is, it multiplies cold which creates heat. The heat then expands, by dividing heat back to cold. In other words, to have a "big rip", would mean that cold would no longer compress and heat would no longer expand.

:)

[sahyo]

yes no "big rip"
like no "big bang"

:)

[rich]

Big Bang? Big Rip?
ohhohohohohohohohaha
The Big Laugh hahahaha
houhohohohohahohohaho
Oh how little we know,
Universe was always, is now
as it was in the beginning, is now,
and shall ever be , forever and ever.
ohhohohohohohahohohahaha :D
:wub: ;) :blink: :unsure:

[sahyo]

:D shmmmmshsshahahallolalolalolllllllllllllllllllllll ll

[rich]

ssssshush :wub: :wacko: ;)

[rich]

Another comment, just for the enigmatics of it:

There is so much emphasis in our discussions about living the here and now, now.

If that be true, why all of the discussion of discussing possibilities of ,
Was it 70 Billion years downstream? Seem to have forgotten, because, I am trying to live here, Now. :ph34r: Please overlook my stupid remarks, for truthfully, do not think it is someyhing I will experience, but one never knows, does one B) :huh: ?

[Thomas Knierim]

Polaris: It's hard to invalidate a hypothesis by using another hypothesis.
That is true. However, it wasn't just another hypothesis. I think that everyone who has followed the cosmological discussion in the recent years agrees that COBE in 1992 and WMAP in 2002 were both groundbreaking missions. It is the observational data that leads us to believe that the universe cannot be closed, not a mere hypothesis. The Big Crunch, and Steady State theories seem much less viable now due to the empirical evidence gathered in the last ten years.

The WMAP results were announced only in February this year. It is surprising to me that it did not become an instant news topic. I mean, the WMAP mission has lead to the postulation of a new cosmological magnitude, dark energy, which was previously unheard of, if we disregard Einstein. In my understanding this has quite some sensational quality. But it wasn't a news topic at all. The news at this time was dominated by mysterious weapons of mass destruction that Huessein allegedly amassed, and how urgently America needed to wipe him out.

It's a sad state of affairs. It seems that hardly anyone is interested in science. Instead people are occupied with warfare. They are more interested in power than in knowledge and continue to bring suffering to everyone. It's all too human, isn't it?

Vicente:The "big rip" doesn't fit my understanding of actual cosmology, which appears quite in balance. To me, if there was the slightest unbalance, it would take a fraction of a second to end the phenomal universe, not 60 million years.

As you probably know, according to the Taoists, balance and imbalance are both temporary conditions. Sometimes Yin dominates, and sometimes Yang. Chaos and destruction alternate with periods of order and creation. These are simply the marks of existence that apply to all entities. The essence is change. We know that stars and planets arise and vanish, as well as galaxies. Our own galaxy will see a period of disaster in five to six billion years when it collides with the Andromeda galaxy. Within the universe this is just a small local event and even if our solar system is destroyed, the universe itself will prevail. But, since the universe itself is an entity of existence it must ultimately face death like any other existing thing.

Before that happens, we will of course have plenty of time to enjoy the universe as it is. To start with, here is the detailed microwave radiation map in 3D-projection showing the sky. It's like snapshot of the universe when it was just born. The various colors indicate minute variations in the background radiation, less than a millionth degree.

http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_ig/020598/020598_ilc_320.jpg

Isn't she a beauty?

Cheers, Thomas

[dog goddess]

if it weren't for scientists thomas we would not be paying attention to warfare. we have none other to thank than the greatest of minds for nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. so those who pay attention to war, pay attention to science.

it is a sad state of affairs. it is all to human.


but it is science.


oh and yes, she is a beauty.

[rich]

Next EASTER
when I Am coloring
Easter eggs. I'll have to remember the pattern and tell everyone, it is The Beginnining of The Universe.

Thomas, Just kidding around, sorry. :(

OK everyone, this is a serious topic, no fooling in science class. :huh: :angry: :unsure: ;)

[Thomas Knierim]

Richie: I'll have to remember the pattern and tell everyone, it is The Beginnining of The Universe.
You will sound more scientific if you call it "cosmic background radiation egg". Goes well with a neutrino bunny. Unfortuntely, Eastern is over... :wacko:

Cheers, Thomas

[Polaris]

Next EASTER
when I Am coloring
Easter eggs. I'll have to remember the pattern and tell everyone, it is The Beginnining of The Universe.

;) So this means the EGG came first... by a long shot!!! :rolleyes:

[rich]

I don't know if the egg came first, but I'll assume that is true.

Maybe when the big bang occurred, that was when all eggs hatched.
The noise from the big bang was the sound of all eggs hatching at the same time. :wacko: :rolleyes: :blink: :unsure: :lol:

[sylph]

Originally posted by dog goddess@Jun 26 2003, 04:07 AM
if it weren't for scientists thomas we would not be paying attention to warfare. we have none other to thank than the greatest of minds for nuclear ... weapons.
albert einstein himself was a pacifist and he opposed all war. he thought that war cannot be justified. however, during world war ii, hitler was to be on the verge of taking over, and einstein realized that some wars could be justified, in extreme cases such as this (in self-defence).

so he signed the letter to president roosevelt to inform him that the war could be won if they invented the atomic bomb. i think the germans were already gathering plutonium (?) or some other substance, so america had to act fast before the germans invented it first.

thanks to einstein's wise decision, we live in the world we live in today.

i think technology is inevitable, but as long as the great minds have great ethical minds, i feel comfortable.

einstein is the icon of mathematical/scientific genius, but unlike most other scientific geniuses, he, in my opinion, was an ethical genius. that's why i admire him above all others. :)

[rich]

Taken out of context, Sylph posted:

thanks to einstein's wise decision, we live in the world we live in today.



The world we live in today, is not that great, for we live in troublesome times with troublesome leaders. :angry:

Of course, things could be worse. :(

Things could be better too. :D

[a random hack]

The noise from the big bang was the sound of all eggs hatching at the same time.
:o

This is your brain. B)
This is your brain playing Boggle :blink:

:D

[sylph]

Originally posted by Thomas Knierim@Jun 23 2003, 09:20 AM
If our species survives the next 19 billion years (and there are serious doubts about this, given our Sun's projected fate) ...
i find that quite depressing. i never put it together like that.

some say you find immortality by either 1) becoming famous; or 2) having children.

but the fact that the human race will eventually die out invalidates this reasoning. our mortality is inescapable. nothing matters, because eventually, we are all going to die anyway.

all the leonardo da vinci paintings; all the shakespearean sonnets; all the music that moves us; all the knowledge, art, and creations accumulated over centuries by human beings... they will all be gone. and no one will know. and it won't matter.

[DavidS]

Originally posted by sylph@Jul 29 2003, 08:02 PM
... they will all be gone. and no one will know. and it won't matter.
To whom? :lol:

In terms of loci of consciousness that exist and are ongoing NOW, however, that sort of 'real'ization is only 'depressing' to those who see and base-line measure value in terms of the time-space 'extent' of the 'domain' of this or that time-space-matter-energy form.

Those who see and base-line 'measure' value in terms of the range[s], quality and intensity[ies] of Life-Spirit-fireworks-expression on the other hand are continually grateful for and celebratory of the [i]infinity (or 'infinity of values') ever-available in moment-to-moment existence.

They may have become convinced that and so 'believe' that consciousness is ever-ongoing, but their value-attitude is nevertheless such that they think and feel that even if they were 'wrong' in so 'believing' and all life really ceased along with physical death-disintegration (personal or galactic), this Life-vehicle is an infinitely, i.e., value-limitlessly rich blessing as is- so they zen-live 'in' joy and jubilation, no lamentation pertaining to 'temporality' whatsover (beyond tail-end mopping up operations pertaining to this during the time-span of the 'crysallis' 'reorientation' process, that is).

At least the latter is a possibility which can be quite logically 'rationalized'. :)

David

[sylph]

yes, i *think* i know what you mean. :wacko: (you write like... kant.)

it depresses me, but it's not that all is lost, that there are no other options.

it just depresses me that what i thought were options, are actually not. that is, the limiting of my options depresses me.

of course, i can find infinity in the NOW, but after my realization, it remains the only option. carpe diem ad infinitum. :wacko:

but there may be another. to enrichen the lives of those who still have hope. :) at least their lives will be meaningful.

[a random hack]

Hey sylph,
You think that's depressing?
Imagine all the things already gone that you were never even conscious of...
Still, imagine how crowded and creatively stiffling it would be if nothing was ever destroyed...

it just depresses me that what i thought were options, are actually not. that is, the limiting of my options depresses me.

Maybe the limitation of your options is no more real than the illusion of having options was...

:)

[rich]

Originally posted by sylph+Jul 30 2003, 10:02 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (sylph @ Jul 30 2003, 10:02 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Thomas Knierim@Jun 23 2003, 09:20 AM
If our species survives the next 19 billion years (and there are serious doubts about this, given our Sun's projected fate) ...
i find that quite depressing. i never put it together like that.

some say you find immortality by either 1) becoming famous; or 2) having children.

but the fact that the human race will eventually die out invalidates this reasoning. our mortality is inescapable. nothing matters, because eventually, we are all going to die anyway.

all the leonardo da vinci paintings; all the shakespearean sonnets; all the music that moves us; all the knowledge, art, and creations accumulated over centuries by human beings... they will all be gone. and no one will know. and it won't matter. [/b][/quote]
Why be depressed if the human species will not be around to witness
the events destined to happen to this planet 19,000,000,000 years from now? A little longer than the twinkling of an eye, I'd say.
Do not think the shelf life of any masterpiece, or any medium it was created on c/would last that long. ;)

Cheer up, we're all in this together. :D

And life goes on. :huh: :lol:

[sylph]

Originally posted by a random hack@Jul 31 2003, 10:46 AM
Imagine all the things already gone that you were never even conscious of...
yes, that's sad too...

Maybe the limitation of your options is no more real than the illusion of having options was...

no options? that's depressing as well. though i do not believe that is true. :)

And life goes on.
no. it doesn't. that's the point. :D

[rich]

ok, life does not go on. ;)

So what? :unsure:

Sylph wants to be immortal ?

Fine, though think, I've had enough. <_<

[a random hack]

no options? that's depressing as well. though i do not believe that is true.

'Options', 'less options' and 'no options' all appear to be merely a matter of preference and opinion.

[sylph]

Originally posted by rich@Aug 1 2003, 08:31 AM
Sylph wants to be immortal ?
I want to have some lasting effect on the world.

Or I think I did.

But upon reflection, I guess 'lasting effect' does not necessarily have to be in the arrow of time. 'Lasting effect', I suppose, can be a vector of intensity, or impact on a person's life.

Like DavidS said. :)

[rich]

Sylph,
Everyone will have a lasting effect on this world. Some good, some not so, but some effect. You are in control of the lasting effect you have. The lasting effect you have and will have is seen by those you converse with.
This post of mine, I am typing now, may even have a lasting effect on you, as well as myself. :) :unsure: :blink:

[sahyo]

feardesires"control"whichnot

[rich]

Originally posted by asheera@Aug 2 2003, 09:59 AM
feardesires"control"whichnot
asheera's post meant for me?

Richie just trying to help sylph. not control her.
Trying to point out, that immortality shoud not be a goal.
Nofearingorfearingnodesirecontrolornocontrol. :ph34r:

[sahyo]

Nofearingorfearingnodesirecontrolornocontrol.



You are in control of the lasting effect you have.

[rich]

Originally posted by asheera@Aug 2 2003, 11:10 AM

Nofearingorfearingnodesirecontrolornocontrol.*



You are in control of the lasting effect you have.


asheera posted:
You are in control of the lasting effect you have.

My words, my sword, return to stab me.

Rich monologging:

A little self control, please. :)
Must do. :D

[sylph]

Originally posted by rich@Aug 2 2003, 09:04 AM
Sylph,
Everyone will have a lasting effect on this world. Some good, some not so, but some effect. You are in control of the lasting effect you have. The lasting effect you have and will have is seen by those you converse with.
yes, but what i was worried about before was that the people you affect will die as well, as well as the people they affect, etc. so if all humanity dies in the end, your efforts will not last through time.

however, if one looks at 'lasting effect' as a measurement of something else other than time, there is hope.

i don't think i really want to be immortal. i just wanted something about human consciousness to be infinite.

[rich]

Life is impermanence. That is why it is called an illusion . [I think.] :)

[sahyo]

sylph....perhaps looking which 'thinking' at 'lasting effect' as a measurement of something else other than time, there is hope 'desiring' something about human consciousness to be infinite

[sahyo]

Life is impermanence. That is why it is called an illusion. [I think.]

which thinks "impermanence"an illusion"richie?

[fu*]

Fu always posting crazy/silliness


body seems not illusion
seems tool for perception
percepting nameless wordless
in out, which only in out after thought
then becomes cloud or knee
grass not grass untill thought grass
before thought, grass ..............no words

percepting everything everywhere
but not thing or where

To sonrisa, FU sometimes your thought/meaning :D

[rich]

asheera posted: which thinks "impermanence"an illusion"richie?

which thinks "impermanence"an illusion"richie?

If richie did not use the word 'thinks', may imply the words, I 'know' , which no one/none, should use assertively. For no one/none really knows. ;)

[sahyo]

which thinks "impermanence"an illusion"richie?



If richie did not use the word 'thinks', may imply the words, I 'know'


didn't post question because posted I think, richie :)

[sahyo]

body seems not illusion
seems tool for perception
percepting nameless wordless
in out, which only in out after thought
then becomes cloud or knee
grass not grass untill thought grass
before thought, grass ..............no words

percepting everything everywhere
but not thing or where

yes :D yes :D yes :D

looking (not looking)......is 'a-perception-percepting'
when (not when) not thing or where?

[rich]

where?
no nowhere,
then where?

RIGHT HERE, and There.
to share :D ;) :blink:

[DavidS]

Originally posted by Thomas Knierim@Jun 22 2003, 07:20 PM
----- The Big Rip -----
Hey, "the Big Rip" is getting more press coverage - here's a recent listing from Compuserve's "What's New" POSTINGS:

Prediction: The Universe Will End In...
...20 billion years. Space.com reports that Robert Caldwell from Dartmouth University and Marc Kamionkowski and Nevin Weinberg from the California Institute of Technology have developed a fascinating Doomsday theory: The universe will die as galaxies, stars, and planets are violently ripped apart. In the 1990s, scientists realized that the universe is expanding, much like it's being sucked outward. So Caldwell asked himself this question: What would happen if the rate of acceleration increased instead of proceeding at a steady pace? The answer is what he calls the Big Rip. The universe will be shredded. Space.com senior science writer Robert Roy Britt says, "Scientifically it is just about the most repulsive notion ever conceived."

[box insert: If the end were really near--say a killer asteroid was headed straight to Earth--would you want to know?]

The good news, besides the fact that it won't happen for 20 billion years, is that even Caldwell admits it's a "pretty fantastic possibility." Still, the universe IS expanding, and Caldwell's calculations are on the money if this phenomenal pace of expansion keeps up. The acceleration would overwhelm gravity as we know it. As Space.com puts it: "Even the nuclear forces that bind things in the subatomic world will cease to be effective."

[box insert: How old is the cosmos? This photo from space let scientists figure out the right age.]

Pretend the universe is a car. Most theories hold that the universe is expanding at a constant rate. It's a car traveling at 20 miles per hour. Never slower, never faster. But the Big Rip theory holds that the car starts traveling faster and faster and faster--and eventually so fast that it just shreds into thousands of pieces. "The expansion becomes so fast that it literally rips apart all bound objects," Caldwell explained to Space.com. "It rips apart clusters of galaxies. It rips apart stars. It rips apart planets and solar systems. And it eventually rips apart all matter. If he's right, the stuff of science fiction--wormholes and space travel--would become real science. What happens after that is a mystery. Maybe time ends. Maybe not. But it's still 20 billion years away!

[box insert: Here's a timeline of the universe--from birth to death.
linked to: http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101010625...5/timeline.html (http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101010625/timeline.html)]

=============

Now, for some 'fun' with this . . . B)

The 'thesis' that the 'stuff' of 'the universe' (re)arranges itself to accommodate and reflect back the 'beliefs' of 'observers' is actually a rather 'narrow' statement of the underlying ('true' in the eyes of some metaphysician types) proposition which actually covers a larger field of phenomena.

The 'braoder' statement is that the 'invisible' mentally-n-emotional state 'inside' us participant-observers will be 'reflected' 'outside' in 'the world' of our perception-n-ex·peer·ience.

This means that not just our conscious 'beliefs'-n-'expectations', in some 'significant' way, 'determine' the 'wave-collapsed' 'shapes' and 'kinds' of our perceptions/concepts and associated ex·peer·iences (even of those ex·peer·iences we have as a result of ·peer·iung 'inward') but our UNconscious one's AS WELL!

OK. You may regard that as poppycock or not, BUT assuming the statement 'truly' articulates the dynamic-nature of the 'meta-reality' we live in but can't/don't 'directly' 'see' and 'ex·peer·ience", THEN, the above 'reflection' (i.e., what 'we' are NOW 'seeing' going on 'in' the universe around us), is actually a 'mystical' OMEN which is 'telling us' something about what's going on 'inside' 'us' -- a the 'reflection' suggests a consciousness-expansion that is accelerating to the point where our view-map-awareness-flied will 'ultimately' (in OUR 'future', that is!) dis-integraten - IOW, the 'way' in which we 'see' and 'make sense' of things NOW will no longer hold together -- presumably, if 'human-kind-o-consciousness' itself does not cease to exist, it will be so radically transformed as to be 'unrecogizable' in TODAY's terms.

Sort of reminds you of the 'prophesy': "And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God. And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away. And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new." (Revelation 21:1-5)

Doesn't it? At least it does me. The "no more sea" thang could refer to no more 'boundary'-divisions between aspects of 'being' -- everything being seen as completely, irrevocably 'connected' or something like that -- what asheera's words are 'pointing' to -- if sometimes target-inappropriately. ;) (asheera: IMO, only!)

The dis·integration could be that of the 'ego' -- hey, one can always 'hope' for THAT! - and maybe the ONE sitting on the THRONE is none other than our our 'own' 'inner' being-doing!!

Things certainly seem to be moving VERY fast in that regard - dichotomous/dualism-BASED world-views ARE falling apart all over the place - 2012 (the 'end' of 'time' of sorts according to 'Mayan-calender' interpretations) is indeed 'nearly' upon us. . . .what a roller-coaster WHOOIEEEE!!!

:) David

[thirst4sun]

You ask the question, " Is there something afer nothing?" Well there must be something, even if that something is total silence. All of the Universes energy would be finally together as one.