<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Current Observational Constraints on Cosmic Doomsday · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/astro-ph_0409264/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/astro-ph_0409264/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Current Observational Constraints on Cosmic Doomsday — mentioned by raattgift</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37256412</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:astro-ph_0409264:37256412</guid><pubDate>Fri, 25 Aug 2023 00:40:57 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Thank you for the kind words. Nobody&amp;#x27;s wanted to talk seriously about &amp;quot;terminal&amp;quot; Big Crunch for many years -- the 1998 type Ia SN light curve redshift work that earned the 2011 Nobel prize in physics pretty much killed off the idea of an inertially-expanding universe, rather than an accelerated expansion. It&amp;#x27;s much easier to recollapse a inertial expansion: &amp;quot;inertial&amp;quot; means there was an effective single impulse that started the bits flying apart from one another, and the bits continue to fly apart along the lines of Newton&amp;#x27;s First Law. However, as far as anyone can tell the driver of the…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/astro-ph_0409264/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>astro-ph</category></item></channel></rss>
