We would get a terrible seed at start -.-
But it does pose some interesting thought. Being isolated inside a void could serve some advantages if the universe is also not quite as devoid of life as we thought.
You can find the original sidebar contents below:
The Busy Center of the Lagoon Nebula
🔭 Science
🚀 Engineering
🌌 Art and Photography
Other Cool Links
We would get a terrible seed at start -.-
But it does pose some interesting thought. Being isolated inside a void could serve some advantages if the universe is also not quite as devoid of life as we thought.
So, the universe may not be that empty, we just live in a bad neighbourhood
Or a good one, if being in a denser area means a higher chance of being in the danger zone of a quasar or experiencing a gamma ray burst. Our galaxy could be in a Goldilocks zone just like our planet is.
We've had a several billion year run where nothing in the universe sterilized our planet (knock on wood, which might only be possible on this planet). That might be one of the great filters.
danger zone
Way to make Kenny Loggins wander through my head.
I'm absolutely sure of it. It seems pretty obvious when you consider that outer space is mostly just a gigantic void without substance. Our math is just now catching up to the reality of our situation.
It seems pretty obvious when you consider that outer space is mostly just a gigantic void without substance.
I think you're confusing two different ideas of "void". You're talking about outer space in general being mostly space but the article is talking about a contrast in the density of matter distributed in different areas of the universe, using the word "void" to refer to an area of low density.
Are you being sarcastic?
They sound more high than sarcastic.
No, speaking the truth. Anyone with any clue knows that space is mostly just an empty void - there isn't much matter between the bits of matter that are there. If you've ever read any of Stephen Hawking or Carl Sagan's work, you know what it is I'm talking about.
If you've ever read any of Stephen Hawking or Carl Sagan's work, you know what it is I'm talking about.
I've read some of Stephen Hawking's works and it seems clear to me that you're muddled in your thinking.
That's too bad for you. But I'll get over it.