Mankind is destroying the universe! o_O
 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/mai...-mostviewedbox

The article is too long to post completely, and I couldn't seperate one or two paragraphs that really explained what the whole thing's talking about. I really just posted this to see what the physicists of the forum thought about it, because honestly, I'm not smart enough to comprehend what the heck they're talking about.

Well if this right, we have a kickass answer to anyone who touts that humans are small and insignificant on the universal scale.

We may be small but we're about as insignificant as AIDs. Now let's go get that multiverse!

Oh no, the Universe is going to end in 395 billion years instead of 416 billion, however can the universe cope with out willful and disobedient interference?

That's the feeling I get from reading that story. The theory that the cat is both alive and dead until someone bothers to look, the theory that the Universe is totally kicking butt until we look and realise it totally isn't - nothing changed but our own perception. I always hated that theory anyways, it's scientific enough and leaves plenty of possibility for open-mindedness but the simple fact is after you find out the only difference is now you know. If the cat is dead it was dead before. Just now you know it was dead. Same thing with the lifespan of the Universe.

The thing that bothers me is that even if we're not specifically observing the dark energy of the universe, we are observing and interacting with it.

Shiney puts it perfectly; all we change is what we think we see.

It'd be nice if that were true but it isn't. The problem with the cat is its not quantum enough. If you get down to actual electrons and atoms things really do exist in two separate mutually exclusive stats. If you're tricky enough you can measure the effects of this supposition and thereby prove that the particle really is existing in both states at once. This is why quantum computing works and why a quantum processor with a few hundred gates has teraflops of processing power. In short supposition is a real measurable effect even if it is to weird to logically wrap your head around.

That being said the main argument is over what to consider an observation. Its kind of hard to tell if something has collapsed a wave function without looking at a system in a way that would collapse a wave function. There is certainly evidence to suggest that just the possibility that information about the state of a system being obtained is enough to collapse a wave function. In which case large systems like the cat and the universe really can't be in a state of supposition because that information will always be potentially available. Its all very strange stuff.

GAH! Gouge out your eyes! Break all the telescopes! Let us never speak of this Dark energy again and drop science entirely, living as a clan of paranoid, superstitious (don't forget blind) cavemen.

Seriously though, I don't think we have much to fear. I have no plans 395 billion years from now, and this is all pretty speculative in my opinion as opposed to definite fact. No viva para el pasado, ni para el presente, pero para el futuro. And in this case, the future that is more important is the future of earth, rather than that of the universe, as the universe seems to be able to regulate itself pretty well.

A universal case of que sera, sera.

That's pretty much what Lovecraft predicted anyway, so kudos to him.

Yes! My thought exactly. Humanity is just way more badass than it used to be.