Posted on 05/30/2005 6:23:52 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
There is no way imaginable that Homo Sapien will be around in 3 billion years.
First of all, we will have to leave the planet because our Sun will begin to change fundamentally expanding about 10% every few hundred million years to eventually become a red giant which will be large enough to reach Earth's orbit.
Before that, however, if we do not destroy ourselves we will either combine ourselves with machines, and no longer be human, alter our genes, or adapt naturally in such a way to deal with the artificial environment we have created over the last 200 years. Eventually we will reach a point where we are no longer the same species.
Most likely is that we eveolve into several different species depending on where in the galaxy we end up.
However my guess is that we cease to be completely and perhaps we give the insects a chance. Ants might eventually establish some form of collective intelligence.
But, if an unbroken line traceable to mammals / simians continues to develop into an increasingly intelligent creature capable of manipulating and understanding his environment, that creature would appear as a god to us. That would be the case in 1 million years. If humanity survives and continues in exponential increase in wealth and knowledge generation, we will be able to stop the galaxies from coliding probably in less than 100,000 years. Its either us or the Tralfalmadorians.
PS please don't tell the people in Kansas I wrote this.
(In my best George Costanza voice):
Of course, the, uh, gravity wells.
The sun and Earth are ejected from the galaxy
Interestingly, I wondered aloud about that exact scenario here a few months ago (and got an answer largely consistent with yours).
Thanks for the thoughtful and descriptive reply.
Exactly what is a "thought-Astronomer"?
I saw a program on the science channel had a program mentioning that the human race will be changing. Either through genetics or adaption to environment. The human race will be around in 3 billion years but not as the current Homo Sapiens..
Who you callin a Homo . . . Sapien?
Seriously though I disagree and I agree. I think humanity will manage to somehow spread life to a different planet. It clearly won't be human, but since we all emerged from a primordial goo at some point, it will be related to us.
Of course 3 billion years might as well be eternity.
As I said before, an unimpeded contiuation of humanity's exponential acqusition of wealth and knowledge will mean we overwhelm the entire universe in less than 100,000 years.
Something will have to give.
Up, 200,000,000 light years. Estimated drive time: 18,461,538,461,538,461,538 years at 65 miles per hour. Watch for construction near Mephis.
Not especially.
Interesting list, I always wondered what kinds of distances existed to galaxies.
Unless, of course, there's a black dwarf in our path.
In order for human intelligence to improve, at least in terms of physical brain size, a physical barrier would have to be overcome. The current configuration of a human female's pelvis only allows babies with a certain head size (and therefore, a certain brain size) to be born. If this doesn't change, either by natural means, or by artifical means (growing babies in tanks, for example), then our brain capacity is going to remain the same.
Has anybody actually seen this deep sky object or knows where to look?
Ah, the 'Terri Schiavo scenario'...
"First the was nothing and then it exploded".
How about the Pegasus Galaxy???
Right.
The distribution of energy (and therefore matter) wasn't even[uniform?] during the big bang, resulting in a universe filled with "filaments" of matter.
Is this also a theory based on another, the big bang theory? IMHO, it doesn't seem to fit a simple intuitive model. That is, presumably EVERYTHING in the universe is steadily moving away from everything else(BTW, is this also theory?), ergo, the gravity wells(another theory?) you mention should be losing strength instead of gaining strength.
It just seems logical to me that if in fact the universe is continually expanding, as it might very well be, the chances of collisions become less, not greater. But, I'm not in the field and never have been; it's just a matter of curiosity that I haven't ran across an acceptable explanation to.
FGS
You'll forgive me if I don't accept at face value what the scientists are proffering given what I've seen from some of that community over my lifetime. Again, is this a fact or theory?
But I can't resist repeating my favorite discreption of the Big Bang;
"First the was nothing and then it exploded".
Now I like that.
FGS
Can you distill this down to something a layman might understand?
FGS
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.