Advertisement
Hey folks. I just joined this tribe and thought I'd give it a whirl by opening with this article:
www.space.com/scienceastr...niverse.html
"...in the far future, radiation--including heat, light and all other forms--will vanish faster than it can be replenished through the decay of matter into component protons, neutrons and electrons"
Am I the only one who has trouble accepting this concept? My understanding is that this universe is one of many and a result of something prior (another universe or something). Up until now, I figured the "end" of this universe would be the "start" of a new one (or something similar). But how can it have any end whatsoever if all you're left with is fast, cold matter?
Certainly someone here understands this new theory (and its consequences or implications) than myself. So, enlighten us.
Thanks for your opinions and explanations
:)
Feiruz
www.space.com/scienceastr...niverse.html
"...in the far future, radiation--including heat, light and all other forms--will vanish faster than it can be replenished through the decay of matter into component protons, neutrons and electrons"
Am I the only one who has trouble accepting this concept? My understanding is that this universe is one of many and a result of something prior (another universe or something). Up until now, I figured the "end" of this universe would be the "start" of a new one (or something similar). But how can it have any end whatsoever if all you're left with is fast, cold matter?
Certainly someone here understands this new theory (and its consequences or implications) than myself. So, enlighten us.
Thanks for your opinions and explanations
:)
Feiruz
posted by:
|
Dallas
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
I haven't read the article yet, but what you have described is an old idea. The results described is pretty much a given in an endlessly expanding universe - matter just get to tiny to interact enough to stay hot.
"My understanding is that this universe is one of many and a result of something prior (another universe or something)." Just one of many ideas - at this point more a subject of one's beliefs than of science. -
-
We want to believe in forever, that the universe always was and always will be.
There was a big shock and disbelief when it looked like the universe had a beginning.
The evidence of the "big bang" is getting deeper all the time.
So why not an end.
Quantum theory states that you can not subdivide forever.
That there is a smallest part to everything.
Why not a biggest part too.
One Universe. Start - Exist - End
Looks good to me.
(Not that I am in charge)
-
-
No. Entropy is a measure of a systems disorder which can increase even as a system cools.
The universe undergoes adiabatic cooling as it expands, which is very similar to the adiabatic cooling of a gas whose pressure has suddenly reduced. It is, in part, the reason why the cosmic microwave background is, well, mircowaves and not, say, greenwaves (yes, this is tied to redshift).
-
-
As Troy says, the general idea is not new. I believe the novel part is the suggestion that the density of matter will remain higher than the radiation density. Apparently someone had previously suggested the reverse would eventually be true.
Trying to read between the lines, it would appear that the discovery of accelerated expansion was critical to their conclusion, although I'm wondering if they didn't have to guess at things like rates of proton decay.
One little fact I always found entertaining: iron is the most energetically stable nucleus. So, in the loooong term, barring other processes, you would expect everything to either undergo fusion (for lighter elements) or fission (for heavier) until nothing but iron remained. It would appear, in that case, that it's actually iron that is forever.
-
