>The universe is only 14 billion years old That's not

>>34560451
You literally can't comprehend how long that is.

>>34560451
Hmmm yea you're right, just thought about it. Not that long really.

Not at all considering it's all existence. What blows my mind is the Roman empire started the same time as 20 100 year olds laid back to back. Just 20 lives ago.

>He doesn't know God

Enjoy hell

>>34560463
Well you have one million years that's not a lot of time is it? Dinosaurs are 60 million years old.
999,999 million years is 1 billion and then you just multiply by 14

>>34560463
14,000,000,000 years. Its not that hard anon. Assumming we all live to a hundred, thats only 1,400,000,000 human lives. Thats less than the number of people alive today.

>>34560451
Yeah. Just twice the number of people on earth, but in years.
>>34560463
You can, retard. Start at 10 and multiply by 10 each iteration, try your best to retain the feeling of how large 10 is and you can get a decent feeling for the number.

File: 1479660383094.jpg (13KB, 414x415px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 414x415px

>>34560512
is anon being facetious

>>34560512
One million years is not a lot of time? That's twelve or thirteen thousand human lifetimes. Believe me it is a fucking long time.

>>34560558
no anon he can comprehend it better than you can you dont understand you know

>>34560483

Don't think people in the past lived long enough to reach the age of 100

Even today the highest life expecatncy is South Korea with an average lifespan of 83.7 years, if you take both sexes into account

>>34560585

expectancy*

>>34560558
Yea, exactly we live like fruit flies.

>>34560512
>>34560514
>>34560539
I didn't say you couldn't comprehend the number. I said you couldn't comprehend how long that is.

>>34560539
>try your best
>you can get a decent feeling for it
Just admit you can't really comprehend it. You can't. You can 'appreciate' the difference between, say, a million and a billion. Sure. But you can't comprehend it. We can't.

>>34560650
Time is not Iinear

>>34560675
oh yes that certainly trumped the other guy's argument

>>34560585
That's average. People live to 100 even in the most backwater shitholes. It's all a crapshoot

>>34560650
I bet you think you also can't comprehend how large the earth is. Go onto google earth and examine the earth. Look at landmarks you can comprehend the size of and compare them to what you see as you examine. If you're not a dumbass, you should be able to get a good idea of how large the world is. If you agree with me that this is possible, but that it is not possible to comprehend the number 1 billion then you have no argument because, by your logic, the differences in size between the size of the earth and the number 1 billion (I know numbers are not landmass and thus are not directly relatable, but think in terms of basic sizeness) would be incomprehensible.

>>34560585
youre a retard holy kek

>>34561169
>>34560650
I should clarify, your argument is that "people can't comprehend really big things because we are puny" and you have no real evidence to back it up. So I'm saying, that if you admit that you can comprehend the earth, as large as it is, then you really shouldn't be allowed to say that you can't comprehend 1 billion simply because it is 'too big.' (it isn't)

>>34560451
Compared the amount of time the universe will exist for, yes, it's quite early on indeed.

>>34560585
That low life expectancy is in part due to high infant/child mortality rates bringing the average down. Once past that point people did live to their 60s or so. Certainly not as much as these days, however.

>>34561206
In general, people can't comprehend polynomial, exponential or higher order differences- not as well as linear differences. I think this is the general sentiment of what anons are trying to say.

>>34561206
Notice how nobody is saying that.

I, and I say this being the first post, am saying that you can't comprehend your scale to something that is fourteen earths large.A billion is a multiple upon a multiple. You can do everything that you just said and do it as many times as you want, but you can not properly appreciate how large that 14x earth is because you are so insignificant in its' scope that it's existence has more merit than any grandiose thought of rational multiplication that you can think of.

This entire exchange is less than nothing on the scope of 14 billion. Some would even call this exchange, a waste of time.

>>34561295
I hate that I fucked up both usages of its' and it's......

we are in a giant black hole in another larger older universe with 4 spatial dimensions

>>34561295
>Some would even call this exchange, a waste of time.
thats nice, anon.

>>34560451
No, our "local" spacetime has existed for 14 billions years

>>34560451
And first civilizations emerged about 5000 years ago.

>>34560463
fpthreaddefiningp

Why does reality exist?
I continually try to envision what would happen if literally 'nothing' existed. Makes my head feel fuzzy. I usually get either all white or all black... but my mind can't grasp that because white/black are 'something'. I can't envision true nothingness.

>>34561553
This is actually a philosophical challenge. The idea of nothingness. I can't remember what it's called but it's called the Exxxxxxxxxxxxxx Challenge

I just remember that it starts with an E and it's literally the idea of that there is no nothing because as long as you think of something when there is nothing then how can there be void? This being a challenge to the philosophical idea of void, which is nothingness.

>>34561553
You either believe in god or nothingness. We won't know for sure in our lifetimes, maybe not even after. I think if we keep building up our knowledge and evolving we might figure it out some time.

>>34561580
I should add that this is a presocratic philosophical challenge. Void, pre socratese was actually considered to be an element of creation, hence the challenge to the concept of void. Though it's essentially asking the question of, "How is there a nothing if you have a concept of the idea of nothing? Wouldn't you not have that concept?"

Thread is full of dumbass standard tards.

How the fuck could anyone prove the universe is 14 billion years old when they don't even know like 0.0000001 of one percent of its content.

The reason? Mad up. Earth is about 100,000 years old, is flat, and at the base of any universe. What we really should be pondering, is what's on the other side of the wall that enclose us.

>>34561238
>Compared the amount of time the universe will exist for, yes, it's quite early on indeed.
I remember when I found out just how young the universe really was, compared to its total lifespan.
If we compare the universe's timescale to a human's, it's essentially a newborn

>>34561295
>you can't comprehend your scale to something that is fourteen earths large.A billion is a multiple upon a multiple
Tell me more, Mr. I Can't Comprehend Big Numbers, how exactly you know that you can't compare 14 massive balls of mass to 10*10 9 times?
You people have no evidence whatsoever that one cannot understand what 1 billion is. You may say it is possible to understand what 10, 100, or 1000 is or maybe 1 million, but for some reason it stops somewhere along the line. Where is this line? Why is it possible to understand 1 earth but not 14? You are shooting yourself in the foot because you have the confidence to say that 14 is too big while simultaneously stating that you can't comprehend the number. Have you gone through the motions, imagining one earth and then two, and three, and so on? It sounds like you aren't even trying to think about it and have just decided to argue with the guy with the unpopular opinion.

>>34561608
>"How is there a nothing if you have a concept of the idea of nothing? Wouldn't you not have that concept?"

Exactly the problem.
What are your personal thoughts on all this, anon? Can nothing truly "exist"...?

>>34561655
Compared to what? Other universes?

Stop spouting nonsense brudda

>>34561664
No, I was just trying to avoid this inane argument, because I have a one specific piece of knowledge. I know that I'm talking to someone that can't properly comprehend how much time that is, so I know that you're arguing with me for arguments sake. That's fine.

It's the internet.

I get it.

This guy gives a very succinct answer. >>34561276

but that would require you to look up things.

The brain has actual problems properly scaling to size anything over a thousand, in short.

Have a good read OP.

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

>>34561673
>Compared to what? Other universes?
Are you fucking retarded or what?
If you put how long the universe has existed on a timescale of how long it's theorized TO exist, it's essentially a newborn.
If that's too fucking complicated for you, then you need to invest in a helmet.

>>34561714
Not him but it can be done with practice by starting over. So past a thousand, its ten thousands, hundred thousands, thousand thousands, then start over again. Not easy but I don't think the limit is ten thousand thousand thousands while keeping it all in perspective

File: 1474934850688.png (32KB, 280x280px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 280x280px

>>34560451
>tfw we're still in the start of the universe
>if modern jew physics is right 99.9999999% of the universe's life will be empty blackness
>red dwarf stars last 100 trillion years

>>34561752
Ah you mean compared to the last time the universe ran it's course? No? Then what?

>Average movie length is say..2 hours long

>We are only five minutes into this movie, based on how long movies normally are, it's safe to say we're are the early into this movie, with alot left

>>34561781
>red dwarf stars last 100 trillion years

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

>tfw we could make our own matrix and live out paradise for 100 trillion years

I bet any advanced aliens chose this over conquering the galaxies

>>34561757
So you're proposing that a person train themselves to get past an actual malfunction in the brains comprehension of spatial awareness to a magnitude that most people have never experienced before... and then do so multiplicatively until they have finally achieved an understanding of 14 billion?

I can safely say that anyone would have died before then.

Daily reminder 1 third of Americans ACTUALLY believe the universe is 6000 years old

>>34561815
And by billion, I meant earths. I just fusion'd two arguments on accident because I'm actually arguing the same thing with both of you, which is just the acceptance of the fact of how impossible it actually is to have any concept of such large numbers on an intellectually meaningful level.

You can not offer any insight that literally anyone else can, which is, "Oh yeah, that's a huge number that means big things." You -literally- don't understand how big it is in terms of scale, if it be spatial awareness or time. You simply can't.

>>34561815
I'm trying right now by picturing a cube 10 years on each side. Then putting those cubes in another cube of 1000, then one more time, and then 14 more of those final cubes. It's daunting and maybe it would take a lifetime or more to grasp, but it's given me an appreciation of the scale for sure. But I have trouble grasping the passage of 10 years anyways.

>>34561295
>This entire exchange is less than nothing on the scope of 14 billion. Some would even call this exchange, a waste of time.

Rekt

>>34561808
>Ah you mean compared to the last time the universe ran it's course? No? Then what?
taking into account timeframes for the various 'deaths' of the universe that can be expected based on our current models of physics you asinine retard.
Say that we all die by heat death. For the last stars to burn out, it's going to take a long, LONG fucking time. Heat death is one of the quicker ones IIRC as well.(aside from the possibilities of random destruction of existence)

Is that simple enough or do you need a fucking picture book

>>34561918
it's funny. There are three separate arguments with three separate retards in this thread and it all comes back to scale.

If there are any other retards in this thread. Scale is a the essence of multiplicative thought. There is a point in which scale becomes incomprehensible and you are now dealing with ideas.

For the assholes that are going to say, "At what point?"
Usually over a couple hundred.
Always over a thousand.

Just to throw the whole loopy twist you idiots keep trying to spin on the idea. What if there was something that occurred so far in the past that we don't even have theoretical evidence of it?

Isn't that a really uselessly obtuse thought?

>>34562075
Well I thought I got through to you for a moment and inspired you. Keep your mind closed then, I don't care since it doesn't matter.

>>34561918
Yes please because you don't make sense.

Picture book please.

REEEEEE

>>34562100
This is honestly why I wish all boards had IDs...

So
>>34560463
>>34560617
>>34561295
>>34561323
>>34561580
>>34561608
>>34561714
>>34561815
>>34561856
>>34562075

Are all me.

I have a very open mind, so I'm guessing you're not talking to me, even though you're responding to my post?

not a long time compared to what?

>>34560451
This is exactly the reason why a lot of us think there's no point in anything. I wish I was a double-digit IQ religious person. Then I could believe a book that says the earth is a few thousand years old and I can pretend to be a special snowflake entitled to a heavenly afterlife or some shit.

>>34562399
You needlessly brought religion into this.

>>34560451
Well it is until the next "big bang"
which was probably the end point for which the previous universe expired why has it not occurred to anyone that "event" could've been a weapon from an external threat far greater then anything imaginable

I wish i was born later so i could watch humans dominate the universe. I read somewhere that earth is like in the first 5% of habitual planets in the universe to form. In the way that with the current amount of elements in the universe that will eventually turn into earth like planents. earth was one of the first to develop from those elements.

Maybe the reason we havnt been visited is because we are the aliens. We are the ones who are gonna go take over the universe and make aliens our little slave bitches.

>>34562584
Because you dont understand the big bang and your talking out of your ass.

>>34562584
I'm not even going to get into the layers of retardation..

How would there be an external threat? Where is it coming from? Are you saying that, because there is the -idea- of a threat that is beyond comprehension that could destroy universes that it must exist?

>>34562584
Pseudoscience. Read a cosmology book. Or at least the wikipedia article on it.

>>34562169
>>34562100
Honestly what are you folks even arguing about?

14 billion years? Huh...strange that people cannot fathom the possibility of eternity, a constant always, unending existence, the universe...distant galaxies light years away across a sea of stars whose flicker of life, light takes 4 years to reach us through the vast expanse of space ...even outside of any and all religious context...as we kinda 'invented' or 'created' that which would ultimitely enslave us all...the enemy. Time.

File: download.jpg (14KB, 300x168px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 300x168px

>>34562680
External threats? Sun flares...asteroids...meteors...

We are not alone...call them whatever you like.

>>34563847
Twas got my noodle in deep thinking mode, m'sir

>>34560451
You are right. It really makes you think.

What are the chances of another Earth-type planet floating around with humanoid type creatures living on it?

File: 1484439668100.jpg (36KB, 628x599px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 628x599px

>>34560451
>The big bang was 15 years ago
Huh, time flies I guess

>>34565002
If the universe (not just the observable universe) is truly infinite and homogeneous? One. The chances are exactly one, i.e. there definitely exists such an earth, even one where you and I are having the same discussion (I'm not going to say "right now" because simultaneity is meaningless on relativistic scales).

This is not pseudoscience bullshit either; if something is possible, it WILL happen in an infinite universe (much like if you toss a coin enough times, you will eventually manage to throw a million tails in order). Such a copy of Earth would be an unfathomably big distance away, of course.

There is a chance that the universe is not infinite of course, in which case probably not, but measurements of curvature show that even if it has a negative curvature and it is finite, its radius is enormous.

>>34565151
Why just one?

Is Earth really such an anomaly?

>>34565798
He means one as in 1/1 or 100%. Actually there is an infinite number of earth-type planets assuming the universe is infinite.

File: homo_erectus.jpg (213KB, 1181x1775px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 1181x1775px

homo erectus had controlled fire for 200 000 years before they started to cook with it

>>34565137
>1990 was 14 billion years ago
It's not that long ago when you think about it.

>>34560558
>implying a human lifetime is long

>>34562169
Go to fucking REDDIT if you want ID's you fuck

>Atheist science lovers will defend multiverse theory as if it's real

>>34565137
Big bang gets underage ban

>>34560451
>14 billion years was 1 month ago

>>34566841
If it is not the case then the case must be that there is simply a consecution of universes.

When this universe "ends" then other one must immediately fill its place.

There can be no period where "nothingness" reigns. Because even if that were the case it would be entirely meaningless as it is literally nothing.

>>34560514
You want to check that math there boss?

i get your point and i agree with you though

>>34560451
>collective human lifespan is much larger than the age of the universe
whoa