7 комментариев для “Как это влияет на наследие парадокса Ферми?”
It doesn’t really. It only means that the Fermi Paradox implies that Earth being «young» means 20 billion years is still implied to be young.
I don’t think the Fermi paradox is dependent on age at all besides one theory being the Earth is one of the earliest life bearing planets. Otherwise, it’s just saying «since they’re not here yet (which I disbelieve), then here’s a few theories as to maybe why».
I always find it fun to think that 2000 years ago the earth was learned to not be flat and 500 years ago we weren’t the center of it and 200 years ago bleeding was a cure and 100 years ago radioactive paints and stones were great to have on you.
And now the universe of infinity could be twice as large….
I’d say this doubles the radius of the universe roughly. But since we weren’t able to reach the old rim in theory, this won’t matter Fermi-Parodoxon wise.
It doesn’t account for the Kardashev scale, my first thought was also “hey imagine what could have developed in all that extra time”.
I wish these «scientists» would quit coming out with this bullshit. They have no clue when the universe was created, hell, they can’t even agree on when the earth was created. They just push this shit to make themselves look like they have a clue.
I remember bigelow saying on joe rogan that the big bang was on its way out. Is this the first rumblings of that? i guess we will have to wait and see.
This research is more of a «what if» than something to truly believe. What they did I believe is to measure redshift considering tired light which is in itself a hypothetical thing so I wouldn’t believe it for now as it is a theoretical way to measure it that is totally different from what we do today
It doesn’t really. It only means that the Fermi Paradox implies that Earth being «young» means 20 billion years is still implied to be young.
I don’t think the Fermi paradox is dependent on age at all besides one theory being the Earth is one of the earliest life bearing planets. Otherwise, it’s just saying «since they’re not here yet (which I disbelieve), then here’s a few theories as to maybe why».
I always find it fun to think that 2000 years ago the earth was learned to not be flat and 500 years ago we weren’t the center of it and 200 years ago bleeding was a cure and 100 years ago radioactive paints and stones were great to have on you.
And now the universe of infinity could be twice as large….
I’d say this doubles the radius of the universe roughly. But since we weren’t able to reach the old rim in theory, this won’t matter Fermi-Parodoxon wise.
It doesn’t account for the Kardashev scale, my first thought was also “hey imagine what could have developed in all that extra time”.
Interesting times we are living in.
I wish these «scientists» would quit coming out with this bullshit. They have no clue when the universe was created, hell, they can’t even agree on when the earth was created. They just push this shit to make themselves look like they have a clue.
I remember bigelow saying on joe rogan that the big bang was on its way out. Is this the first rumblings of that? i guess we will have to wait and see.
Does the announcement have something to do with the rushed disclosure? Might be a coincidence but the timing seems odd.
This research is more of a «what if» than something to truly believe. What they did I believe is to measure redshift considering tired light which is in itself a hypothetical thing so I wouldn’t believe it for now as it is a theoretical way to measure it that is totally different from what we do today