I'n new here having just found this area to discuss this concept. Perhaps there are more recent posts. I will check tomorrow. But for now, to revitalize the topic I would like to add to the latest comments.
The number of 10^40,000 itself is missing the parameter of time. As we know it today, the universe in in the area of 14 billion years old. That number should be used when conceptualizing that 10^40,000 represents ~ever~. Not 10^40,000 per hour or per millenia. Ever! So the Hitchhiker reference is immaterial since it doesn't even come close to the component of time.
That being said. How does the recent discoveries of the Keppler exoplanets alter the 10^40,000 calculation?
I'n new here having just found this area to discuss this concept. Perhaps there are more recent posts. I will check tomorrow. But for now, to revitalize the topic I would like to add to the latest comments. The number of 10^40,000 itself is missing the parameter of time. As we know it today, the universe in in the area of 14 billion years old. That number should be used when conceptualizing that 10^40,000 represents ~ever~. Not 10^40,000 per hour or per millenia. Ever! So the Hitchhiker reference is immaterial since it doesn't even come close to the component of time. That being said. How does the recent discoveries of the Keppler exoplanets alter the 10^40,000 calculation?