From: laura@nospam.me
"personalpages.tds.net/~rcsilk" wrote in message
news:41f835c7_3@newspeer2.tds.net...
> "David Mitchell" wrote in message
> news:pan.2005.01.26.08.03.26.108912@edenroad.demon.co.uk...
> > On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 01:12:06 -0600, personalpages.tds.net/~rcsilk wrote:
> >
> >> it's quite possible the universe is a LOT older than we think it is (as
> >> light-based physics only work for 14 billion years distance) and the
rest
> >> we
> >> *can't* see is too far away and traveling at too great a speed to
detect!
> >
> > There are a number of techniques used to age the universe - and they all
> > give roughly similar figues.
> >
> > The "stuff we can't see" is considered to be outside the "Hubble
> > Universe"; which is the subset of the, possibly greater, universe that
> > will never have any effect on us, since we can't interact with it.
>
> Ahhh, but ... WHAT IF?!?!?!? the outside universe is so immense that
there
> is, at *this very moment*, a geometrically progressing (exponential) "Big
> Crush" that is headed straight for us? A day ago, it was billions of
> light-years outside of our visible spectrum, yet today, it is on the *very
> edge* of our visible spectrum, and tomorrow, it will be only 1 parsec
> away... etc.
>
> I'm beginning more and more to agree with the concept that quantum
mechanics
> have, if nothing else, helped further the cause that God exists... "no one
> knows, not even the Son of Man, when the End Days shall arrive" (or
> something to that effect).
>
Quantum mechanics is often used by "paranormalists" as a scientific-sounding
cureall. If it's not explainable conventionally, it's always "quantum", but
that just doesn't make it any more scientific :-)
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
