/tech/ - technology

If it's going to start shrinking into the black holes and the black holes will start eating each other to form one giant black hole, then what is going to happen after this black hole bursts (Gamma-ray bursts). Might sound stupid, but what I thought of is another Big Bang.
Could it be that the Big Bang is in fact a burst of a giant black hole?
What will happen then, after it bursts? Will the history repeat itself again(Historic recurrence). Endless circle of the universe.
Thinking about the topic of the edge of space makes me think that the teories about us living in the simulation might be true.
Just ask yourself: what is after the edge of the universe? What is the edge? What if the "edge" is just the end of the simulation and there is just nothing there; the memory on the super computer can only allow this much of a space to exist; the simulation can't process more information. Makes me think: what is the purpose of the black hole? Is it there so the files of the simulation would be deleted in order to create new files and so that the memory of the simulation would never end? "Auto-destroyer", so that the simulation would continue endlessly. Endless cycle of the "Universe".

>>1932
>Might sound stupid, but what I thought of is another Big Bang.

It's not stupid, this stuff exists:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclic_model

I don't think there is a second me out there though, things like the human brain are way too complex for "copies" to exist for no reason. You'd need way to many tries with evolution to arrive at anything that is similar to humans. I do believe in other life forms though, but they'd be completely different in any case. Maybe some kind of sponge that covers whole continents. Who knows.

I love to think about the edge of the universe, but it's mind boggling. It's where space ends, so can there be other space? how are they separated? then what is between them? I don't know.

I like to think that people will laugh about all our theories in a thousand years so any of the far fletched stuff we come up with today is likely nonsense. Like, just look at dark energy and dark matter. It makes up 95% of all "stuff" and we have no clue what it is, we just know that is exists, or that our theories are so damn wrong they only work if you make this all up. Thats a huge amount of soykaf right there.

>>1933
>I don't think there is a second me out there though, things like the human brain are way too complex for "copies" to exist
I think what Alice meant was that this would be true if the universe was truly infinite. In that case, by the laws of infinity, there would be infinite exact copies of your brain, along with infinite copes with one extra neuron etcetera. The universe if almost certainly not infinite, but who knows what lies outside it. Perhaps Infinite copies of our universe, along side infinite versions which are almost the same, except for a slight difference at the start that results in you being named Grabdor.

>>1931
>>1932
I see a few problems with your thinking. The first one third of your post is just "woah, big things are sooo big, woah dude mind blown exact earth copy". Being this impressed with something opens you up to being gullible and think new-age. Magicians, clowns, parents try to get children into this mindset to sell them anything they want, be it santa or the importance of eating your veggies. If you get into this mindset, wait until it goes away and treat any ideas you got on it as if it was the ramblings of someone on LSD.

>But if the Universe isn't endless, what comes after the edge of it? WHAT IS THERE???
You are abusing language or thinking statically. If the edge of the universe is the edge of the universe, the question doesn't make sense, is invalid, is just language abuse.
If there is however something beyond the edge of the universe, it wasn't the edge of the universe after all. You were thinking statically. The actual edge is after this "WHAT IS THERE???" thing. This is the same mistake as calling atoms atoms - atom means "cannot be divided" but they can into quarks, yet people still call it atom, language is being stupidly static. If you say there is an edge of the universe and something beyond it, you are calling some inner layer the edge of the universe, you're being static. You need to find it a new name and call the thing that is outside of everything else the edge of the universe. You need to dynamically adjust the name of things, or you'll fall into language bullsoykaf like this.

We don't _know_ the big bang, it's just a theory as is an expanding universe and everything ever claimed by physicists. Be aware that when you incorporate anything claimed by physics as a field, you are doing a game of "what if". It's good for practical purposes and short-term simple predictions.

I won't even bother with the big-bang simulation part, it's just more of the impressed mind-blown shenanigans.

>>1941

Yeah, I hate the fact that people call atoms atoms, it doesn't make sense, it's divisible, Democritus is disappointed with us.


I only wanted to say that (._.i)

Neverminding the fun police, there are in fine two logical possibilities. Space is infinitely large, even if it's just unthinkable distances of emptiness beyond the universe's expansion, beyond dark matter, etc. Or it is not infinitely large, and if we arrived at its border, we would end up on the other side and eventually back to where we started. The latter is in my mind, the only imaginable answer, among the reasons being that it doesn't make you have the painful experience of trying to picture infinity in your head.