• Afaithfulnihilist@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Stuff only burns for so long. We might learn more about the geometry of space and that there is more out there at greater distances where maybe even other Big bangs are possible but there is a certain maximum amount of time that a star can exist.

    Over the time scales of the life of a proton the maximum variability in the amount of time a star can burn is a rounding error against the scale of numbers needed to express the amount of time it takes for hawking radiation to reduce black holes to ultra long wavelengths of infrared radiation.

    • faintwhenfree@lemmus.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yes, but we don’t have proof that universe can’t generate new matter. For all we know there is a mechanism in universe not yet observed that can create new matter out of little vacuum and more stars will keep forming.

      So technically all we can say is, it’s likely that stars will die out in 1000 trillion years.

      • ubergeek@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yes, but we don’t have proof that universe can’t generate new matter.

        True… we also don’t have proof there isn’t a tea pot orbiting our Sun since it’s creation, either.

        However, there’s also a complete lack of evidence of it.

        You cannot prove a negative. The evidence says no new matter can be created. No evidence that new matter gets created. Therefore, we work on the model of no new matter creation.