
Timeline of the Far Future - nixass
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_far_future
======
RivieraKid
Related ideas that seem kind of obvious but haven't seen them mentioned
anywhere yet:

1\. We live in the most interesting 200 year period of Earth so far in its
4.5B year history. The rate of progress has never been so high, one notable
example of why this period is special and unprecedented is that it's the first
time humans or any species has visited the Moon. It's quite a mind-blowing
coincidence.

2\. Human history will probably look like a sigmoid curve - long period of
stagnation followed by rapid progress followed by a long period of stagnation.
We were born into a very short period of something like 1000 years with the
highest rate of progress. After that, we'll gradually enter an equilibrium in
which things won't change much (or a period in which history will just repeat
with minor variations). The year 300,000 will look similar to year 301,000 -
despite being separated by a millennium - this is unthinkable at this point in
time. You can't keep inventing novel technology and art at current pace for a
million years. Has there been any debate about how this long period of
equilibrium could look like?

~~~
nromiun
> We live in the most interesting 200 year period of Earth so far in its 4.5B
> year history.

People have been saying this for centuries now. And they will probably
continue to do so in the future. Our rate of progress looks so high because we
are living in it. Cut to another two hundred years and 2000 will look just
like 1800.

~~~
RivieraKid
For the last few centuries maybe. Your underestimating how utterly anomalous
has been the last about 200 years. There's a clear contrast between that and
all prior 200 year periods. The idea of progress is relatively recent, 2
thousands years ago it basically didn't exist (from the book Sapiens).

------
cletus
Mandatory Isaar Arthur links:

\- Civilizations at the End of Time: Iron Stars [1]

\- Civilizations at the End of Time: Black Hole Farming [2]

\- Boltzman Brains and the Anthropic Principle [3] [4]

[1]:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pld8wTa16Jk&t=1080s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pld8wTa16Jk&t=1080s)

[2]:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qam5BkXIEhQ&t=10s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qam5BkXIEhQ&t=10s)

[3]: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UfQb_-
XAuY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UfQb_-XAuY)

[4]:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrK9EaQRp2I](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrK9EaQRp2I)

------
baxtr
Fun fact: this link has already been submitted 27x on HN

[https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...](https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=%22Timeline%20of%20the%20Far%20Future%22&sort=byDate&type=story)

~~~
dang
Best to fish for the nontrivial threads:

[https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...](https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=comments%3E4%20%22Timeline%20of%20the%20Far%20Future%22&sort=byDate&type=story)

~~~
baxtr
Thanks dang! I did know the comments command

~~~
baxtr
*didn’t

------
at_a_remove
I have often thought about what it would be like in the far, far future. After
the age of baryons comes to an end, we would also see an end to _structure_ :
you cannot build anything out of leptons larger than a positron and electron
orbiting one another, delicately, at a distance. No chains, no three-way bonds
or glorious carbon four-way bonds, just a froth of electrons, positrons, and
variously-flavred neutrinos and anti-neutrinos.

If the Big Rip were to happen, one might imagine civilizations forming around
the event horizons of black holes ("dead stars still burn") fizzing out
Hawking radiation, getting ever closer to avoid the Big Rip, a controlled fall
designed to balance against the stretching of space while harvesting what you
could get from Hawking radiation. I've seen projections, sketches, really, of
computation that involved states only changing as energy became free, and so
these civilizations would be almost frozen in amber to outsiders but ticking
along from their vantage point, up until the black holes' "temperature" drops
too far below the ambient themal bath. The decay gets faster and faster as the
curvature of the event horizon increases, so that civilization's end would
have an incredible speedup right before the black hole itself evaporated.

~~~
eternauta3k
An electron-positron bound system decays in under a nanosecond:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positronium](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positronium)

~~~
at_a_remove
"Delicately."

------
slg
>50,000 years - The length of the day used for astronomical timekeeping
reaches about 86,401 SI seconds due to lunar tides decelerating the Earth's
rotation. Under the present-day timekeeping system, either a leap second would
need to be added to the clock every single day, or else by then, in order to
compensate, the length of the day would have had to have been officially
lengthened by one SI second.

I guess we have another annoying clock problem to work on once we get done
fixing the Y2038 and Y10k bugs.

------
moh_maya
Some of Stephen Baxter's [1] books in the xeelee sequence explore a sci-fi
version of this [2]; it's a fascinating ride, if you are interested in
thinking of how sci-fi has dealt with this..

[1]
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Baxter_(author)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Baxter_\(author\))

[2]
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_(Baxter_novel)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_\(Baxter_novel\))

~~~
zantana
Made me think of the Dancers at the End of Time books, although they're more
philosophical than sci-fi.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dancers_at_the_End_of_Time](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dancers_at_the_End_of_Time)

------
maxwell
Timelapse of the future:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uD4izuDMUQA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uD4izuDMUQA)

------
Andrew_nenakhov
Btw, what I don't get about black holes: why is everyone so fixed on the event
horizon and calls everything below 'a singularity'?

From our point of view, of course, we don't have much use for it. But inside
it might be rather interesting. For one thing, everything under the event
horizon is unlikely to be homogenous. Captured matter is likely to form a much
less object in the center of the hole, with a much smaller radius. Between EH
and this 'core' many things can happen. For example, if matter forms N
accretion disk spinning around the hole and just above the EH, why should it
stop doing the same thing after it goes below? Only because we no longer can
see it doesn't mean it stops existing and loses all energy and angular
momentum. Or it does?

~~~
pdonis
_> why is everyone so fixed on the event horizon and calls everything below 'a
singularity'?_

They don't. The event horizon is at r = 2M. The singularity is at r = 0. There
is an interior region in between, so the singularity is not "everything below"
the horizon, and I'm not aware of any reputable source that says it is.

 _> why should it stop doing the same thing after it goes below?_

It's not that infalling matter will suddenly change its behavior as it crosses
the horizon: it won't.

It's that infalling matter has very little time once it crosses the horizon,
before it hits the singularity. For example, in a 1 solar mass black hole,
it's only 10 microseconds from the horizon to the singularity. Since the time
is linear in the mass of the hole, that means that for, say, the 3 million
solar mass hole at the center of the Milky Way, it's only 30 million
microseconds, or 30 seconds, from the horizon to the singularity. And even for
the most massive hole we've observed, 66 billion solar masses, it's only 660
billion microseconds, or 660,000 seconds, or less than 8 days, from the
horizon to the singularity. On a cosmic scale these times are very, very
short.

 _> it doesn't mean it stops existing and loses all energy and angular
momentum. Or it does?_

Any energy and angular momentum of matter falling into the hole gets added to
the hole's mass and angular momentum.

~~~
Andrew_nenakhov
> _It 's that infalling matter has very little time once it crosses the
> horizon, before it hits the singularity. For example, in a 1 solar mass
> black hole, it's only 10 microseconds from the horizon to the singularity._

Why should it be hitting the singularity at all? Why can't particles have a
stable orbit just under the event horizon? Is it because the orbit speed would
exceed the speed of light?

> _The singularity is at r = 0._

Also, why singularity at all? Neutron stars compress to a certain density and
then stop compacting any further. Of course, gravity in black holes is
stronger, but why people think that all matter would compact into a
singularity? Can't it be a very dense object where compacting force is
compensated by matter density limit? (i don't know the exact term in english,
sorry)

~~~
pdonis
_> Why should it be hitting the singularity at all?_

Because the singularity is in the future of every event inside the horizon.
It's a moment of time, not a place in space. It can't be avoided because
tomorrow can't be avoided.

 _> Why can't particles have a stable orbit just under the event horizon? Is
it because the orbit speed would exceed the speed of light?_

That's one way of looking at it, yes.

 _> why singularity at all?_

Because that's what the math of GR predicts.

 _> Neutron stars compress to a certain density and then stop compacting any
further._

Neutron stars have a maximum mass limit. So do white dwarfs and every other
kind of stable compact object. Anything over that maximum mass limit has to
collapse into a black hole.

 _> Can't it be a very dense object where compacting force is compensated by
matter density limit?_

Not for objects above the maximum mass limit. See above.

~~~
Andrew_nenakhov
> _Neutron stars have a maximum mass limit. So do white dwarfs and every other
> kind of stable compact object. Anything over that maximum mass limit has to
> collapse into a black hole._

See, this is the crux. From what I read in GR theory, once the neutron star
gets over mass limit, the gravity becomes that big that light can't escape it
any longer. OK. Light can't escape. Buy why would a matter suddenly work
radically differently under the event horizon?

Imagine an asteroid, which has an escape velocity of 1m/s, so it's inhabitants
can launch pinballs to outer space with a simple catapult. This asteroid
eventually collides with another one, with an escape velocity of 2m/s, so
pinballs wouldn't leave the body's gravity field. Nothing really changes on
the asteroid, all physics processes work in the same regular way.

Why should it be that different with neutron star vs black hole? NS with ~3
solar masses has radius ~10km, and is a giant lump of neutrons packed
together. To me it looks like BH should be the very similar lump of neutrons,
just so heavy that light can no longer escape. So what? It should still be a
spherical lump of neutrons underneath, just denser.

~~~
pdonis
_> From what I read in GR theory, once the neutron star gets over mass limit,
the gravity becomes that big that light can't escape it any longer._

No, that's not what happens. What happens is that if a neutron star just under
the mass limit gains some mass, it _collapses_ into a black hole. It does not
just change a little bit. It changes a lot.

There is no such thing as a static object that is "just short" of being a
black hole. A theorem called Buchdahl's Theorem says that no static object can
be smaller than 9/8 of the Schwarzschild radius for its mass, i.e., 9/8 of the
size of a black hole of the same mass. That means there is a finite gap in
size between any static object and a black hole. So any transition from some
static object, whether it's a neutron star, white dwarf, or anything else, to
a black hole can't be a small continuous transition.

 _> why would a matter suddenly work radically differently under the event
horizon?_

It's not "matter" that "works differently", it's the geometry of spacetime
itself. The geometry of spacetime inside the event horizon is simply different
from what you are used to, and has different properties than those your
intuition is familiar with. One of those properties is having a singularity a
finite time in the future.

 _> To me it looks like BH should be the very similar lump of neutrons, just
so heavy that light can no longer escape. So what? It should still be a
spherical lump of neutrons underneath, just denser._

No, that's not what a black hole is at all. A black hole is vacuum inside. It
is not an ordinary object made of matter. It is made of very unusual and
counterintuitive spacetime geometry. Nothing else.

As for the matter that originally collapsed to form the black hole, it
continued to collapse until it reached zero size and formed the singularity.
It isn't there any more. While it was collapsing, its physics was the same as
for any other body of collapsing matter; nothing about that changed when it
fell below the event horizon. But the black hole is not made of the matter
that collapsed.

The "black hole" concept you are describing would make sense in Newtonian
physics (and indeed John Michell in the 1700s proposed a similar model of a
Newtonian gravitating body with escape velocity greater than the speed of
light that worked like this), but it is not possible in GR. GR is not the same
as Newtonian physics.

------
arithma
Are there similar predictions but on a short time scale. Like from now until
10,000 AD?

Culture, technology, and geology (and hey, everything else, biology,
astronomy..)

I find it hard to try and see what the future may hold, and it seems that is
the case since we're at an event horizon of human culture change. Talks of
singularity already having come upon us is relevant in terms of predictability
to a certain extent, but I kind of feel comfortable to say that humanity will
indeed stabilize in at most 5k years, since we're already hitting marginal
returns in technology investments. There might be two more singularities that
can unlock more unpredictability: AI and biology.

~~~
baxtr
I was always looking for some “realistic” SciFi for the next let’s say
500-1000 yrs. I couldn’t find anything that didn’t include some stuff that was
clearly coming out of the Fantasy domain

~~~
reanimated
Well, 120 years ago moon landing was from fantasy domain too :)

~~~
baxtr
Fair enough :)

------
FillardMillmore
Looking at the future of humanity section:

> 10,000 - If globalization trends lead to panmixia, human genetic variation
> will no longer be regionalized, as the effective population size will equal
> the actual population size

> 10,000 - Humanity has a 95% probability of being extinct by this date,
> according to Brandon Carter's formulation of the controversial Doomsday
> argument, which argues that half of the humans who will ever have lived have
> probably already been born.

So in 10,000 years we're either all going to look the same or we'll all be
dead? Yikes.

~~~
Green_man
"no longer be regionalized" implies greater but not absolute homogeneity to
me. There will likely still be variation, but it won't be associated to
different countries or continents as it is now.

~~~
stephenr
So, a _slim_ chance racism will cease to exist.

------
DenisM
There was an artistic video about the far-future timeline, part of it was
post-humans first jumping form star to star, then making new stars from
hydrogen, then splitting stars into small stars to conserve hydrogen, then
sitting out the rest of their existence around one last decaying star.

Anyone remembers that video? Wish I could find it now.

~~~
Donald
Heat death is also the central plot of Asimov's short story, "the last
question":
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Question](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Question)

~~~
tim333
I came across that just yesterday funnily enough through Scott Adams going on
about a podcast featuring it. (American Red Pilled, Let there be light)

------
caiobegotti
Some events have a 5k years period between them but the first one "far" in the
future is 10k years from now. I wonder though, are there any imminent or very
likely event to happen between today and the next 5k years? I mean, that would
fall in the categories listed there...

~~~
undebuggable
For Europe that would certainly be post-glacial rebound. Gulf of Bothnia cut
off from the Baltic Sea, and England slowly sinking (many people would have
strong opinions about it, I guess). Netherlands and Venice are a league on
their own with sea flooding problems.

Then pale skin and blonde/red hairs evolved when humans started to reclaim
land after withdrawal of glacier in the same region of Europe, so 5k-10k years
is sufficient for a new appearance feature in humans to evolve.

------
davidw
Makes cleaning the garage seem a bit futile.

~~~
RobertoG
certainly, why bother? :-)

In the same vein there was a joke that goes something like this:

A professor is giving a lecture and he says:

-"In 4 billion years Andromeda will collide with our galaxy".

Somebody in the audience stand up and says:

-"Excuse me! did you say 4 billion or 4 million?"

-"Four billion"

-"Dude... you worried me there for a moment.."

------
Robotbeat
The most mind-bending parts are those that occur beyond Heat Death.

~~~
nabla9
Roger Penrose has really mind-bending observation and theory about the time
past heat death in the 'Cycles of Time'.

After 10e100 years when there is only massless particles like photon's left
and black holes have evaporated, time essentially stops existing. Photons,
gluons and gravitons just go without any new events to infinity.

~~~
seiferteric
Also listened to this and was mind-blown. But my take away was that at this
point photons can then "make it to infinity" which sort of meant they will get
through to (or cause?) the next big bang. Maybe all the photons combine and
cause the big bang? One thing I didn't understand was that he said this meant
that signals could make it through to the next iteration of the universe.
However my understanding was that all photons are scattered by the surface of
last scattering (CMBR), so how could this be possible?

~~~
Robotbeat
Spontaneous entropy decrease that leads to Big Bangs at least every
10^10^10^56 years.

Well after heat death and "final" energy state of the Universe.

10^10^10^56 years sounds like a long time, but it's way smaller than
infinity... Imagine Graham's number, which is still finite and thus much
smaller than infinity...
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham%27s_number](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham%27s_number)

------
rafaele
A prediction for 1.1 billion years in the future:

> The Sun's luminosity has risen by 10%, causing Earth's surface temperatures
> to reach an average of c. 320 K (47 °C; 116 °F). The atmosphere will become
> a "moist greenhouse", resulting in a runaway evaporation of the
> oceans.[65][70] This would cause plate tectonics to stop completely, if not
> already stopped before this time.[71]

Would somebody be able to ELI5 the connection the Earth's average temperature
and plate tectonics?

~~~
noneeeed
Not a geologist, but I rember reading something about this a while back, so
this might be BS. I believe it's because the water being pulled down at the
subduction zones (where one plate gets forced down under another) help
lubricate the whole process. I think that without that water I think the
mantel becomes too stiff.

------
haunter
>The red supergiant star Antares will likely have exploded in a supernova. The
explosion should be easily visible on Earth in daylight

How would that look like? Can't imagine it.

~~~
icegreentea2
The wiki links seem to say that they expect the supernova to register at -12.5
apparent magnitude. The sun has an apparent magnitude of -27, and the full
moon has an apparent magnitude of -12.

So the supernova will first appear as a single dot approximately as bright as
a full moon hanging in the sky. I don't know how large the explosion will
appear, but the article on the Crab Nebula
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SN_1054](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SN_1054))
which was probably observed by Chinese (and other) astronomers in has some
descriptions, as well as a simulated image of the skyscape the astonomers may
have seen. SN 1054 was estimated to have an apparent magnitude of -6, so like
250 times dimmer than they think Antares will be.

------
mke
thank you for this wonderful rabbit hole into Boltzmann Brains!
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boltzmann_brain](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boltzmann_brain)

------
undebuggable
Still too early to invest in real estate on Lōihi, dammit. Post-glacial
rebounds in Scandinavia and Canada are much more promising.

------
qwertox
Somewhat related: "The End of the World", which is an 8-episode podcast which
presents some of the ways how the world could come to an end.

[https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-end-of-the-
world-w...](https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-end-of-the-world-with-
josh-clark/id1437682381)

------
henearkr
I love this kind of long term timeline.

One science-fiction author writing about far futures is Stephen Baxter.

------
viach
So, GWT 3 won't happen ever. OK.

------
standardUser
There is a lot of awful naming throughout the scientific community, but "Milky
Way" has long been my personal least favorite.

'...the Andromeda Galaxy will have collided with the Milky Way, which will
thereafter merge to form a galaxy dubbed "Milkomeda"'

Now it's my second least favorite.

~~~
627467
Maybe you'll prefer the original (dead-language) Latin version: Via Lactea.
Sounds cooler to me, maybe because it's a Dead language name.

~~~
darkvertex
Incidentally that is exactly what we call it in Spanish.

Fun tangential fact: "Star Wars" in Spanish is known as "Galaxy Wars" (La
Guerra de Las Galaxias.)

