You cannot select more than 25 topics Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.

54 lines
2.6 KiB
HTML

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters!

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters that may be confused with others in your current locale. If your use case is intentional and legitimate, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to highlight these characters.

<DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<title></title>
<meta charset="utf-8">
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../style.css">
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="style.css">
</head>
<body>
<div id="content"><h1 id="long-time">Long Time</h1>
<h2 id="six-sigma-fortune-telling">Six Sigma Fortune Telling</h2>
<p>The future cannot be predicted with certainty, but our current
understanding in various scientific fields means we can predict some
far-future events, if only in the broadest outline. These fields include
astrophysics, particle physics, evolutionary biology, plate tectonics
and sociology. The far future begins after the end of the current
millennium, in 3001 CE, the start of the 4th millennium, and continues
until the furthest reaches of future time. This timeline includes
alternative future events that address unresolved scientific questions,
and is, in fact, not six sigma accurate at all.</p>
<p>This timeline (based on Wikipedias <a
href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_far_future">Timeline
of the Far Future</a>) claims to make accurate predictions far into the
future at timescales that are difficult to comprehend; beyond our
lifetimes, beyond the death of the earth, beyond the death of atoms. The
scientific method claims to have an intense relationship to the material
world which is “orders of magnitude” more accurate than other ways of
interacting with and understanding where we are. The scientist often
pits themself as “against” the fortune-teller, the tarot reader, or the
mystic, and yet they make even bigger claims about our collective
future. Is there any way to disprove the scientists method in their own
mind?</p>
<p>This web-based game attempts to highlight the uselessness of this
approach. Sometimes a human can have no effect on the extreme truth that
science offers, or to put it more usefully, sometimes, science has
nothing to offer humans. This timeline uses scientific and objective
distance to avoid the most inevitable and obvious event in the future:
your own death. Death is non-relational: no one can die in ones place,
and we cannot understand our own death through the death of others
(Heidegger, 1962). Just like the scientist, the philosopher doesnt have
much to offer solace here. So where do we go to talk about death?</p>
<figure>
<img src="long-time-2.png" alt="Screenshot from the game" />
<figcaption aria-hidden="true">Screenshot from the game</figcaption>
</figure>
<div class="centered-image">
<figure>
<img src="long-time-3.png" alt="The future isnt coming" />
<figcaption aria-hidden="true">The future isnt coming</figcaption>
</figure>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>