PDA

View Full Version : The Dark Era



BOXER4
2004-Apr-28, 08:10 AM
I need some help finding more info on The Dark Era, Ií am doing a research paper for school. Your help is greatly appreciated!

Thanx,
ART

antoniseb
2004-Apr-28, 12:23 PM
What do you know about it so far? What level are you in school? If you don't tell us these things, we'll waste time writing too much, or rather than risk that, we'll write nothing.

Tiny
2004-Apr-28, 04:24 PM
Originally posted by BOXER4@Apr 28 2004, 08:10 AM
I need some help finding more info on The Dark Era, Ií am doing a research paper for school. Your help is greatly appreciated!

I found this information on the website :
The order of fate of universe :
Big Bang --> Inflation Era --> Radiationdomation Era --> Neuclei Era --> Aging Era --> Black hole era --> and finally the Dark era :

Most of the major events happened in Aging Era, because you know stars turn into Brown dwarf or white dwarf or sometime nova or supernovae and planet leave their orbit...etc. After the aging era, since everything(Mostly stars) become dark or cool or dimmer, the only thing that still alive it's the black hole, but after trillion and trillion year later, black hole die and release most of the radiation into space which evaporate into photon and other types of radiation. (I don't know why they call it the waste products, oh well) Now only waste products remain, mostly photons, neutrinos, electrons and positrons, that wandering around the entire universe, soon or later the universe bcome cold, dark and dismal... --> dark era

Hope this help
Cheers

BOXER4
2004-Apr-28, 07:35 PM
Thanx for the help, I'am in my Junior year at UT El Paso. Its about a 15 page paper. The info that I know is this...
The Dark Era 10100 years into the future. At this late time, after the stars have burned themselves out, the galaxies dispersed, protons have decayed and black holes have evaporated. Nothing but a vast sea of waste products from these processes remain, mostly photons of colossal wavelength, neutrinos, electrons, and positrons. For all intents and purposes, the universe as we know it has dissipated and is in total blackness.


Art

antoniseb
2004-Apr-28, 07:48 PM
Originally posted by BOXER4@Apr 28 2004, 07:35 PM
Its about a 15 page paper.
Ooof, fifteen pages about the dark age... And you posted a pretty good summary of the age right here. I assume that it's an astronomy paper, and not a philsophical tract on the pointlessness of life and living.

The first several pages would have to be about the events preceding the dark age. After that will be tough. I suppose you could do something about the density of the neutrinos, photons, electrons and positrons, etc and the frequency of electron-positron annihilation. Or you could discuss Dark Energy in the dark age [dark matter density may also be of some interest, it depends on what the dark matter really is].

Good luck. Let us know what you write about. I'd have trouble coming up with fifteen pages on that topic.

Duane
2004-Apr-28, 08:21 PM
The Dark Era 10100 years into the future

I assume you mean 10^100 yrs :)

There was also a Dark Era at the beginning of the universe--a period after space became opague but before the first stars ignited.

An article at Space.com called All Galaxies to Become Ghosts, Frozen in Time and Space speaks to the subject. See this (http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/universe_end_011212.html).

Another theory to maybe try to counter the dark age, is the so called Big Rip (http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/big_rip_030306.html) first proposed by Robert Caldwell (http://www.dartmouth.edu/~caldwell/) at Dartmouth.

This article (http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0112/13enduniverse/) from Spaceflight Now has a little bit of information.

This (http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Research-Review/Magazine/1997-fall/village/fate.html) is an article about work done by Saul Perlmutter of Berkley and his search for omega. Related, but not really on topic.

Hopfully this will get you started.

Good luck with it :)

GOURDHEAD
2004-Apr-29, 02:25 AM
Does anyone know what the then frequency of the cosmic microwave background radiation of today was back during the early dark ages. Depending on the available instrumentation there may not have been an early dark age even though no stars had yet formed.

Tiny
2004-Apr-29, 02:35 AM
That was a hard question >< since the wavelength was higher, the frquency must be very shorter...

GOURDHEAD
2004-Apr-29, 03:24 PM
I may have focussed on the wrong (different) dark era. After the universe cooled sufficiently for the opaqueness to subside but prior to the formation of stars, there were no light sources. I thought this was the era of concern. The rest of you are focussing on a time in the future when the stars may have decayed to the point where they are no longer light sources. Maybe including both eras will help fill up 15 pages. Quite a few pages can be filled with how dark could the universe have been just after the opaqueness subsided and the radiation that is now know as CMB was prevalent and its frequency was much higher.

antoniseb
2004-Apr-29, 03:42 PM
Originally posted by GOURDHEAD@Apr 29 2004, 02:25 AM
Does anyone know what the then frequency of the cosmic microwave background radiation of today was back during the early dark ages.
As you noted in a later post this wasn&#39;t the dark era that BOXER4 was asking about, but it is a very interesting question.

In the absence of someone who really knows, my understanding is that the light that was first passing through the neutral hydrogen 400,000 years after the big bang was mostly ultraviolet in the lyman range 90-120 nm wavelength.

At 1.2 million years after the big bang, the background should have looked blue.

At two and a half million years it should have looked red

At some point in the low tens of millions of years, the background was body-temperature [40 degrees Celsius].

From then on, it should have gone increasingly toward the current far infrared / microwave part of the spectrum.

StarLab
2004-Apr-29, 06:29 PM
Gosh, People&#33;

The mayan calendar ends in the year 2012. BOXER4 claims the Dark Age is ten-thousand-one-hundred years in the future. That can&#39;t be right. I believe humans attained conscious thought over the past twelve thousand years for a reason. Everybody seems to think the point of our species is to witness the end of the universe as we know it before we can get out of our own Solar System. For the moment, why can&#39;t we assume the Dark Age is AT LEAST a few billion years into the future&#33;?

antoniseb
2004-Apr-29, 10:33 PM
Originally posted by StarLab@Apr 29 2004, 06:29 PM
BOXER4 claims the Dark Age is ten-thousand-one-hundred years in the future. That can&#39;t be right.
It isn&#39;t right. What you saw was bad conversion to ascii, where what he must have had was 10^100. This is the usual date given for decay of the last proton [roughly]. Very often on-line newspapers and other sources have 10 followed by a superscript power, and it turns into 10NM where NM are the power digits. BOXER4&#39;s mainstream, he&#39;s not studying alternative sciences.

StarLab
2004-Apr-30, 03:55 AM
Ahh, right...scientific notation...I get it now.