I think we should “Guest” in all the original posts to “Ghost”.
You probably couldn’t. Technology is built on what came before it. You cannot necessarily leap frog tech and the more futuristic the tech the less likely you would even know what you were looking at if you saw plans.
For instance, if I took the blueprints for an iPhone back to 1900 they’d have no idea what to do with it and would almost certainly consider it a bunch of hooey. Even if they didn’t and firmly believed it did what I said it did and that it would be a real thing they wouldn’t have a prayer of building one. They wouldn’t even know where to start.
The program to interpret the Random output seems to me to be particularly difficult to the point of being impossible. If you confined the random input to random computer code it sounds to me like you are trying to test a more complicated halting program. Instead of deciding if the program will halt you are deciding if it is useful.
The OP is understandably shy …
I don’t think you follow sir. My question was, does life ever die beyond our human identity? By this I do not mean does my “soul” live on after my heart stops beating. I am asking whether or not life itself actually has an end. If time does not exist, then why would there ever be an end?
What do you mean by “life”?
Good question, I suppose just the universe and well lifeforms because the universe has a set process to create conditions capable of lifeforms.
Probably. The current cosmological models indicate an end to the cosmos itself.
Time exists.
The simplest refutation of the OP:s idea I can think of is this: you can easily write down an infinite list of integers which doesn’t contain, say, the number 18. Case closed?
Easily? That would take FOREVER!
“Infinite” is not a number. The universe may be unmeasurable, but you cannot frame probability in terms of something that is not a number. Some analogies simply cannot be contorted into meaningfulness.
Case closed. And about time too!
Or, at least, until the stars were going out…
As I recall, putting out all the stars required a much smaller number.
So you knew it all the time?
yes
Well, all I can do is to assure you: you won’t feel a thing.
Infinite universe does not equal infinite planets. Granted there are a lot of galaxies but they do no nor would not fill up an infinite universe so it doesn’t make any sense.
Well, an infinite universe that looks like what we can observe of our own would, necessarily, mean an infinite number of planets, stars, galaxies, superclusters of galaxies, etc.
However, there’s no guarantee that, if you were to go far enough in a given direction, things would appear differently. There might be immense gaps or voids, and then supergaps and supervoids, until, by fractal geometry, you find an infinite extent filled with only a finite amount of stuff.
We don’t know enough to say whether this is the case.
(We likely will never know, because of the faster-than-light “expansionary phase” of the Big Bang: there are vastnesses of cosmos that are beyond our ability to observe.)
Infinite doesn’t make sense in this discussion. Too many different sorts of infinity, and not enough definitions or assumptions.
As noted - infinite space does not mean infinite possibilities. There are rules, and the rules would need to be changing within an infinite set of rules. So that is both another infinitude, and an unaddressed set of assumptions.
Then you get into all the questions about the geometry of space-time. So what sort of infinitude do you expect across the options?
Then you could worry about the nature of spacetime and the continuum. Want to invoke fractals? We could have all sorts of fun.
Fun is about all such thinking is. Any idea that we have any handle on anything other than a small subset of the possibilities, let alone any sort of idea of what reality might be is fanciful.