PDA

View Full Version : Does the universe ever really die?



Plat
2004-Jul-01, 05:56 AM
Or does it die but then another big bang occurs

cyrek1
2004-Jul-01, 01:37 PM
cyrek1 reply

Platinum Rhymer
With the current added boost to the BB from dark energy, looks like it will slowly evaporate into oblivion.
The BBer's will have to find another cosmological constant to counteract this expansion.

Better yet, if we all switch to a SSU, we will all have everlasting life (humor).

Gullible Jones
2004-Jul-01, 03:11 PM
The universe is currently expanding at an increasing rate. After a very, very long time, it will die a death of sorts - galaxies will run out of hydrogen and fade into oblivion. Temperature differentials will slowly fade away, and the universe will become a dark, frigid, and very boring place. After a much longer period of time, protons will supposedly become unstable, at which point it is probably safe to say that our universe is dead for all practical purposes - not that there would be anyone around to say that. (BTW, don't get depressed about this. The probability of any life staying around for this long is almost nill.)

Cyrek1, we won't need another cosmological constant to counter the expansion, since the expansion has been observed. It's there; we'll just have to deal with it.

skeptED56
2004-Jul-01, 06:51 PM
The Big Rip! (http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/big_rip_030306.html)

Gullible Jones
2004-Jul-01, 08:41 PM
Oh yes, I forgot the about the "Big Rip". It would require the acceleration of the universe's expansion to be greater than it currently is, IIRC.

Brady Yoon
2004-Jul-02, 02:05 AM
Ok, so we're saying that the universe first expanded extremely quickly, during the inflationary era, then slowed down for a couple billion years, and is now speeding up? Why is this happening?

Gullible Jones
2004-Jul-02, 03:01 AM
I'll have to look this one up... I've got at least 5 books that say something about it, and a SciAm issue devoted to it... *Yawn* Will edit post, or post again if necessary, tomorrow morning...

(Ugh. I really should not have to look this stuff up. But as a famous character in a famous book once said, "Tired is stupid.")

SiriMurthy
2004-Jul-02, 03:27 AM
Ok, so we're saying that the universe first expanded extremely quickly, during the inflationary era, then slowed down for a couple billion years, and is now speeding up? Why is this happening?
Dark energy?

Plat
2004-Jul-02, 03:28 AM
so whats yeah, its basically a cycle huh but it never truly dies right

SiriMurthy
2004-Jul-02, 03:30 AM
The universe is currently expanding at an increasing rate. After a very, very long time, it will die a death of sorts - galaxies will run out of hydrogen and fade into oblivion. Temperature differentials will slowly fade away, and the universe will become a dark, frigid, and very boring place. After a much longer period of time, protons will supposedly become unstable, at which point it is probably safe to say that our universe is dead for all practical purposes - not that there would be anyone around to say that. (BTW, don't get depressed about this. The probability of any life staying around for this long is almost nill.)

Cyrek1, we won't need another cosmological constant to counter the expansion, since the expansion has been observed. It's there; we'll just have to deal with it.
OK, granted that the universe will die a cold death. But, is there any chance that the matter in this dead universe slowly decay to form fusionable Hydrogen again? Has that process been theorized at all?

If no such thing can happen, there cannot be any background radiation. Can the temperature reach Absolute Zero?

Celestial Mechanic
2004-Jul-02, 03:41 AM
Was the universe ever "alive" in the first place?

Plat
2004-Jul-02, 03:58 AM
i mean will the big bang happen again

Archer17
2004-Jul-02, 04:12 AM
i mean will the big bang happen againIMO no, but I couldn't tell you how the first "big" banged anyway .. and for all you "minds in the gutter" out there, that ain't what I meant. :wink:

Seriously, I think that there's only one big bang per universe, PR. We had ours.

Plat
2004-Jul-02, 04:28 AM
what do you think caused the big bang?

Gullible Jones
2004-Jul-02, 04:38 AM
Well, lessee... There's the brane collision theory... and the out-of-nothingness theory (that the universe spontaneously formed out of the quantum foam)... Other stuff too...

Candy
2004-Jul-02, 04:42 AM
Seriously, I think that there's only one big bang per universe, PR. We had ours. I haven't had mine, yet. Oh, you mean the Universe? :lol: BTW, close your eyes Gullible.

Archer17
2004-Jul-02, 04:56 AM
what do you think caused the big bang?I don't know.

Gullible Jones
2004-Jul-02, 03:47 PM
I second what Archer17 said. There are hypotheses a-plenty, but none of them can be proven as of yet.

cyrek1
2004-Jul-02, 04:01 PM
cyrek1 reply

Rhymer
Talking about the bill bang is getting to be a big joke.

George
2004-Jul-02, 04:51 PM
I second what Archer17 said. There are hypotheses a-plenty, but none of them can be proven as of yet.

I'll third it. :)

If the "dark energy" comes from a residual supercooled Higgs Field, or something similar, then acceleration outward will stop which will keep us warmer longer. Then there is M-theory with brane collison (as stated earlier).

Too many unknowns but, I suppose, it deserves being tossed around just for fun. At least we know, it won't be soon (or is that another brane I see coming at us). :wink:

Plat
2004-Jul-02, 06:08 PM
do you guys think there will be another big bang that will create a new universe, because "matter cannot be created nor destroyed" right?

ps: i am obsessing about this because i am a strong believer in reincarnation

and what the heck is a brane?

and how old is our universe in human years, eg. 10, 12, 14, etc?

George
2004-Jul-02, 07:40 PM
do you guys think there will be another big bang that will create a new universe, because "matter cannot be created nor destroyed" right?
BB theory does not discuss how it was created. Know one knows what happened at t=0. We do know something happened or we wouldn't be here. :)


and what the heck is a brane?
I think, at heart, scientists really like puns (although they have not encouraged me much. :wink: ).

String theory has been a slow painful developement that seems to have gaind great respect due to a number of reasons. It requires 10 dimensions to operate. It is hoped that it will tie GR and quantam mechanics together. (sorry if there's a pun there as I'm using restraint for once). Everything would be made of these one-dimensional vibrating strings. The vibrations determine particle properties. M-theory takes
string theory to 11 dimensions. This extra dimension allows a "brane" to be the size of our universe. Therefore, if other branes are outside our universe, maybe they interact somehow. It has been shown that two branes colliding could explain BB results but with more of a "splat" than a "bang".


...and how old is our universe in human years, eg. 10, 12, 14, etc?
Which human? About 14.1 million Methuselah's. :). Ok.... About 14 (14 billion years). 13.7 billion is favored currently.

John Dlugosz
2004-Jul-02, 07:47 PM
The universe is currently expanding at an increasing rate. After a very, very long time, it will die a death of sorts -

Since we don't understand Dark Energy, we can't extrapolate. Maybe it turns around again in a few billion years? Maybe the energy pumped into the expanding space will create new particles or a new big bang.

a_lost_packet_
2004-Jul-02, 07:58 PM
do you guys think there will be another big bang that will create a new universe, because "matter cannot be created nor destroyed" right?

Well, there probably won't be another "Big Bang" in this Universe. There just isn't anyway that we can figure out how matter could "re-condense" given the actors that we currently believe are working to affect the ever increasing expansion rate.

However, it may be possible that a singularity within a Black Hole could lead to another Universe much like ours. Maybe a "creative outlet" for your reincarnation ideas could be found there. IIRC in order for a singularity to lead to another Universe, that Universe would have to operate under the same physical/spatial laws as ours. So, if that is where they "go" then you could have a large number of other "4-D" Universes. IF that is where they actually "go." :) Eventually though, there would be only so many BH windows you could pass through. A BH isn't going to create additional matter than what is available. So, each "Universe" spawned off of a singularity would get progressively smaller I would assume. Therefore, if each have the same laws and each are progressively smaller, pretty soon, you'd be reincarnated in something the size of a small closet with the thermostat set at .00001 K. Bring a coat. :)

Matter can't be created or destroyed from/to "nothing".. well, not as such. But it certainly can be "converted." If the Universe is on a perpetual expansion "kick" then there will come a time when the energy density is so miniscule as to make the concept of "energy" a moot point. Things will approach so close to a "0" level that it wouldn't make much difference. It's going to get fairly cold in the very distant future. Bring a coat. :)

As George stated, branes are a way to explain some physical laws that just can't take place within the rules of our "plane Jane" 4-D Universe. In any event, while not proven, they certainly look promising. String theory requires these "pockets" in order to remain sane. :) George also mentioned one of the more interesting "Universe Creation Theories." Ekpyrotic Theory deals with the collision of two/more "dimensions" (branes) that could have possibly been one of the factors involved in creating our Universe. These would be two "branes" colliding that had different sets of physical/spatial laws. Their collision could have lead to the creation of our 4-D Universe. It's an interesting idea and fun to think about. Do a google on "Ekpyrotic Theory" for some interesting reading.


a_lost_packet_

John Dlugosz
2004-Jul-02, 08:21 PM
and what the heck is a brane?


Short for "membrane", an N-brane refers to a curve (sheet, Volume, hypervolume, etc.) in the larger space.

If one end of the string is confined to only be allowed at certain points, that collection of points is a brane.

Consider a 3-space analogy: in a box, there is a sheet of rubber passing through it. It's not flat, though, but possibly crinkled up. Whatever, it's still a 2-brane.

George
2004-Jul-02, 08:27 PM
... These would be two "branes" colliding that had different sets of physical/spatial laws. Their collision could have lead to the creation of our 4-D Universe.
They also could explain our acceleration of the expansion of space. We might be embracing another brane. (Not too soon, hopfully) :)

Welcome to the board. =D> Looks like you won't be "lost" here, and, you came in with a "bang". :wink:

Plat
2004-Jul-03, 01:55 AM
yeah i like that brane colliding theory, it would explain how all "this" happened

and yes i believe our souls reincarnate

a_lost_packet_
2004-Jul-03, 02:06 AM
Hiyas Platinum Rhymer.

Btw, the guys over at TheSpaceSite.com were asking about you the other day.

This is "Sender."

I only have three "net" handles.. unfortunately, a_lost_packet_ wouldn't "compute" on their forum.. So I used Sender.


Welcome to the board. Looks like you won't be "lost" here, and, you came in with a "bang".

Thanks George! Ekpyrotic Theory is interesting. I ran across it while doing some digging around on Feynman (ain't google fun?) and have enjoyed playing around with the idea. To be honest it's alot "neater" than that stuffy ol' Big Bang idea. <cough cough> You have to admit, even though it may have it's problems, the idea of a colosal "collision" in the space-time continuum spawning our Universe is pretty inspiring. After all, doesn't everyone like to goggle at a good "wreck" on the freeway? :) The bigger the better I always say!


a_lost_packet_

Plat
2004-Jul-03, 02:48 AM
so what is it do you believe there are other universes out there or if there will be another big bang

Gullible Jones
2004-Jul-03, 03:53 AM
There could be other universes out there, but we wouldn't know if there were. :wink:

Candy
2004-Jul-03, 04:22 AM
String theory has been a slow painful developement that seems to have gaind great respect due to a number of reasons. It requires 10 dimensions to operate. It is hoped that it will tie GR and quantam mechanics together. (sorry if there's a pun there as I'm using restraint for once). Everything would be made of these one-dimensional vibrating strings. The vibrations determine particle properties. M-theory takes
string theory to 11 dimensions. This extra dimension allows a "brane" to be the size of our universe. Therefore, if other branes are outside our universe, maybe they interact somehow. It has been shown that two branes colliding could explain BB results but with more of a "splat" than a "bang". Didn't Einstein take a look at String Theory? I thought I read that somewhere. As I recall, his reaction was not so positive. I love the concept and hope it is correct.

George
2004-Jul-03, 04:24 AM
Oddly enough, other branes "out there" does speak of things outside our universe. I suppose it shows credibility to string theory that such things are considered.

In a few years, colliders will give enough energy to particles which might test some of the predictions. The Higgs boson will be a major find, no doubt.

Gullible Jones
2004-Jul-03, 04:26 AM
Didn't Einstein take a look at String Theory? I thought I read that somewhere. As I recall, his reaction was not so positive. I love the concept and hope it is correct.

That I never heard of. Maybe you're thinking of Kaluza-Klein theory... I forget his responce of Theodore Kaluza's letters, though. (It would be in Michio Kaku's excellent book Hyperspace, IIRC. BTW, that's a great book, very easy to read...)

Candy
2004-Jul-03, 04:34 AM
BTW, that's a great book, very easy to read...) Thanks for looking out for me. Seriously, check into what Einstein possibly said. I remember something to the effect of He thought it was 'hog wash' - this is my terminology of what I may have read. As I am not a big fan of Einstein, I don't know why my memory would have thought this up. :-k

Gullible Jones
2004-Jul-03, 04:46 AM
Not a big fan of Einstein? How is that possible? :P

Really. The guy was a genius, a philanthropist... and a socialist, at least to some extent. During the Red Scare, the FBI kept an enormous folder on him... (Yes, I'll admit that I don't like total, no-holds-barred capitalism, though I'm definitely not an all-out socialist either.)

Oh yeah, and he also had a great sense of humor.

Candy
2004-Jul-03, 04:51 AM
Oh yeah, and he also had a great sense of humor. Other threads can rehash my views of Albert. Let's just say this, he had a good woman at his side everytime he had a good thought. 8-[

Gullible Jones
2004-Jul-03, 04:53 AM
Only 2 women. True, the one he stayed with was his second cousin... that is legal, though it definitely was a poor decision from the genetic point of view.

Plat
2004-Jul-03, 05:25 AM
so after this universe, its done with, its over?

imagine when all the galaxies are all separated......that must suck

Candy
2004-Jul-03, 05:47 AM
so after this universe, its done with, its over?

imagine when all the galaxies are all separated......that must suck My gut feeling tells me you will be around, in some form or another, for a very long time. It may not be on Earth, but it will be somewhere we eventually make eco-habitable. I wish I could be around to see it, but perhaps my re-incarnated self will remember. It remembered the previous 30 years before this 1966 birth, so I think I am ok.

Candy
2004-Jul-03, 06:05 AM
Sorry, got off subject. Please continue.

semi-sentient
2004-Jul-03, 06:56 AM
Check this out for more info: Colliding branes and the origin of the hot big bang - Paul Steinhardt (http://pauli.physics.lsa.umich.edu/w/arch/som/sto2001/Steinhardt/real/)

The above lecture requires Real Player, but I would highly recommend using Real Alternative (http://a1.edskes.com/r/realalt123.exe) instead (if you don't already have it).

genebujold
2004-Jul-03, 09:02 AM
The universe is currently expanding at an increasing rate. After a very, very long time, it will die a death of sorts - galaxies will run out of hydrogen and fade into oblivion. Temperature differentials will slowly fade away, and the universe will become a dark, frigid, and very boring place. After a much longer period of time, protons will supposedly become unstable, at which point it is probably safe to say that our universe is dead for all practical purposes - not that there would be anyone around to say that. (BTW, don't get depressed about this. The probability of any life staying around for this long is almost nill.)

Cyrek1, we won't need another cosmological constant to counter the expansion, since the expansion has been observed. It's there; we'll just have to deal with it.
OK, granted that the universe will die a cold death. But, is there any chance that the matter in this dead universe slowly decay to form fusionable Hydrogen again? Has that process been theorized at all?

If no such thing can happen, there cannot be any background radiation. Can the temperature reach Absolute Zero?

Who knows?

About five years from now we'll probably read that when time ends (mentioned in the article) all universal constants will no longer apply, distances will cease to have meaning, and BANG...

Don't sweat it, though - it's what? Like billions of years down the road?

genebujold
2004-Jul-03, 09:03 AM
Check this out for more info: Colliding branes and the origin of the hot big bang - Paul Steinhardt (http://pauli.physics.lsa.umich.edu/w/arch/som/sto2001/Steinhardt/real/)

The above lecture requires Real Player, but I would highly recommend using Real Alternative (http://a1.edskes.com/r/realalt123.exe) instead (if you don't already have it).

Got anything I can read? I only hear as fast as they speak, about 100 words per minute, but I can skim a heck of a lot faster...

Gullible Jones
2004-Jul-03, 03:25 PM
About Real Player: like MoMo said, use Real Alternative. Real Player gets into every nook and cranny of your system, hogs up tons of RAM, and in general stinks rather badly.

Plat
2004-Jul-03, 05:04 PM
so after this universe, its done with, its over?

imagine when all the galaxies are all separated......that must suck My gut feeling tells me you will be around, in some form or another, for a very long time. It may not be on Earth, but it will be somewhere we eventually make eco-habitable. I wish I could be around to see it, but perhaps my re-incarnated self will remember. It remembered the previous 30 years before this 1966 birth, so I think I am ok.

you a firm believer, me too how did you remember your 1966 birth? and i think we all will be around cause we are the universe you know

okay, how many trillion years left can the universe sustain life as we know it

"all universal constants will no longer apply, distances will cease to have meaning, and BANG..."...what another big bang?

Plat
2004-Jul-04, 01:51 AM
http://www.marxist.com/scienceandtech/big_bang.html

Gullible Jones
2004-Jul-04, 02:51 AM
You know, you don't have to post a link to Marxist.com just because there's a left-winger here... I'm not a fan of Karl Marx, you know... 8-[ ;)

Plat
2004-Jul-04, 03:49 AM
You know, you don't have to post a link to Marxist.com just because there's a left-winger here... I'm not a fan of Karl Marx, you know... 8-[ ;)

so what are you saying?.....do you believe what the people in the article are saying though

Candy
2004-Jul-04, 04:08 AM
you a firm believer, me too how did you remember your 1966 birth? and i think we all will be around cause we are the universe you know It wasn't so much the birth, as it was the previous death that I "recall". I could PM you with more details. Usually, this kind of talk is not welcome. I believe it borders on religion. I may not be spiritual, but I do value the spiritual beliefs of others. OMG, Gullible Jones is slowly making me morally conscious of others. 8-[

Gullible Jones
2004-Jul-04, 04:14 AM
On the subject of reincarnation, false memories can be formed very easily...

Also, reincarnation completely violates the laws of physics and of common sense. (Different body + different personality + different thinking processes = different person, regardless of memories.)

Then again, maybe I shouldn't go there... I must not try to poke holes in peoples' beliefs, lest they get angry at me... 8-[

Candy
2004-Jul-04, 04:18 AM
Then again, maybe I shouldn't go there... I must not try to poke holes in peoples' beliefs, lest they get angry at me... 8-[ You sure you don't have a photo, because I think you are so cute. :D

Gullible Jones
2004-Jul-04, 04:22 AM
You sure you don't have a photo, because I think you are so cute.

[Edited to remove possible rudeness.]

Plat
2004-Jul-04, 06:07 AM
On the subject of reincarnation, false memories can be formed very easily...

Also, reincarnation completely violates the laws of physics and of common sense. (Different body + different personality + different thinking processes = different person, regardless of memories.)


science doesnt explain everything.....

and candy PM me about that

Gullible Jones
2004-Jul-04, 06:09 AM
Ah, okay.

Science doesn't explain everything... yet. (Hey, maybe that should be my new signature. ;) )

Plat
2004-Jul-04, 06:16 AM
Ah, okay.

Science doesn't explain everything... yet. (Hey, maybe that should be my new signature. ;) )

so what do you think, will there be more big bangs? i mean i have read alot and it seems to be a split decision

and here, past live memories are made up?

http://falun-al.servehttp.com:99/recommended%20english%20articles/Evidence%20for%20Reincarnation.htm

Gullible Jones
2004-Jul-04, 04:27 PM
Hypnosis is actually much better at creating false memories than brinigng back real ones. And as I said, false memories are very easy to create under other circumstances.

milli360
2004-Jul-04, 05:48 PM
Only 2 women. True, the one he stayed with was his second cousin... that is legal, though it definitely was a poor decision from the genetic point of view.
There were his sister, and secretary, too, and other girlfriends. He married his first cousin (on both sides), after she nursed him back to health, but they didn't have children. Darwin did, though, didn't he?

Plat
2004-Jul-04, 06:24 PM
Hypnosis is actually much better at creating false memories than brinigng back real ones. And as I said, false memories are very easy to create under other circumstances.

but didnt you read the whole link, the memories are accurate to the time periods.....

and again? do you think there will be more big bangs?

Gullible Jones
2004-Jul-04, 07:16 PM
I already said that I don't really know. But remember, making things up doesn't explain anything.

Plat
2004-Jul-04, 08:06 PM
I already said that I don't really know. But remember, making things up doesn't explain anything.

yeah thats true but i am leaning on a cyclical universe because it makes more sense.....

Gullible Jones
2004-Jul-05, 03:49 AM
Ahh... But not everything that is correct "makes more sense"... Ask Milli360 about it for more info.

Also, who's sig is it that says, "Optimism cannot change the laws of physics"?

milli360
2004-Jul-05, 07:34 AM
Ahh... But not everything that is correct "makes more sense"... Ask Milli360 about it for more info.
My favorite example is the existence in this Universe of Pauly Shore. :)

genebujold
2004-Jul-05, 12:54 PM
Naw... It just fades away....

semi-sentient
2004-Jul-05, 03:50 PM
Check this out for more info: Colliding branes and the origin of the hot big bang - Paul Steinhardt (http://pauli.physics.lsa.umich.edu/w/arch/som/sto2001/Steinhardt/real/)

The above lecture requires Real Player, but I would highly recommend using Real Alternative (http://a1.edskes.com/r/realalt123.exe) instead (if you don't already have it).

Got anything I can read? I only hear as fast as they speak, about 100 words per minute, but I can skim a heck of a lot faster...

You can go directly to the slide show here: http://pauli.physics.lsa.umich.edu/w/arch/som/sto2001/Steinhardt/real/sld001.htm

It's much easier to understand if you listen to the lecture/video though. :)

Plat
2004-Jul-05, 08:04 PM
i think this thing is cyclical and there were numerous big bangs before the one we had those turok and steinhard dudes make a good point

genebujold
2004-Jul-06, 11:33 AM
Check this out for more info: Colliding branes and the origin of the hot big bang - Paul Steinhardt (http://pauli.physics.lsa.umich.edu/w/arch/som/sto2001/Steinhardt/real/)

The above lecture requires Real Player, but I would highly recommend using Real Alternative (http://a1.edskes.com/r/realalt123.exe) instead (if you don't already have it).

Got anything I can read? I only hear as fast as they speak, about 100 words per minute, but I can skim a heck of a lot faster...

You can go directly to the slide show here: http://pauli.physics.lsa.umich.edu/w/arch/som/sto2001/Steinhardt/real/sld001.htm

It's much easier to understand if you listen to the lecture/video though. :)

Click, wait.... Click, wait...

People - please put your slide shows and WAV files on direct download links so that people like I, who have fat pipes capable of downloading 900 MB in 12 minutes can peruse them at our own relativistic speeds instead of having to wait on a 21-hop lag time for each slide.

Thanks.

And thanks, Mo-Mo. I did take the time to look it over. But 34 slides took me 100 seconds, which was 60 seconds longer than it should have taken...

And while I actually finished LaPlace and Fourier transforms in college, I can proudly say that while I remember the concepts, I've forgotten the underlying equations.

I can also say that those who can't translate the equations into English know precisely half as many languages as they should.

Perhaps that's what was in the voice???

The world may never know - the world is busy flipping through the Internet at 2.8 seconds per page! Either post the script, or expect to be ignored!