GUEST
E-MAIL
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 02:43:43 EDT
From: Dad
Subject: light sand
August 10, 1998
Dear Heidi ~
Happy Birthday!
In addition to your other gifts, I estimated for you, in my head (just
like old times) (elapsed time: c. 20 minutes), the number of grains of
sand that would fill the known universe. This also in honor of your
skepticism about light being the foundation of fundamental scientific
knowledge. BTW, the red shift thing also bothers me. A lot. The known
universe would hold approximately 1.7 x 10^92 (I rounded) grains of sand,
assuming your stated speed of light, current pronouncements that the
universe is 15 billion years old, and my own personal estimate that 4
grains of sand (spherical, of course), side by side, equal 1/8 inch.
Doesn't the fact that, on the light assumption, we could state the number
of cubic inches in the universe, cast the doubt of absurdity on the
assumption?
Worse, listen to this: The Hubble group says they can see
back to about 94% of the distance to the big bang. In all directions,
mind you. It's only a small technological step to the state where 94%
becomes 100%. At that point, they are looking at the big bang itself. Of
course, everything, including the molecular stuff you and I are made of,
was/is in that big bang. So if you're looking, you're looking at
yourself. Worse -- the big bang was/is simply a point. So they're
looking at the exact same point in all directions? It gets worse. Don't
we define that nothing can fit into a point. So if we're at a point and
also looking at that point (the one with our own molecular stuff, i.e.,
we're in it), aren't we looking at something that can contain exactly
nothing. We're looking at nothing. We don't exist, after all? Well,
anyway, it was fun.
Love,
~ Dad
P.S. If a grain of sand has a billion atoms, the known universe would
have approximately 1.7 x 10^101 atoms of that type. Maybe, say,
8.5 x 10^102 protons+neutrons (I rounded again).
|