< 1 2 3 4 > 
 
   
 

Subatomic calculations indicate finite lifespan for universe

 
Skipshot
 
Avatar
 
 
Skipshot
Total Posts:  8638
Joined  20-10-2006
 
 
 
23 February 2013 01:11
 
Hannah2 - 22 February 2013 09:18 PM

But hey, in a billion years, we should probably be able to detect tachyons and dark matter and who knows what else.

Gaaaahhhhhhdddddd. . .  perhaps?????  He can run but he can’t hide.  We’re searching between atoms and the furthest reaches of the known universe.  We’ll find that. . .  guy. . . someday, and when we do he’ll have some splainin’ to do.

 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  15893
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
23 February 2013 01:22
 
Fool4Reason - 22 February 2013 09:15 PM
GAD - 22 February 2013 02:25 PM

The sun going out instantly was just for demonstration proposes, look at Wikipedia to see what a full star life looks like.

For the rest the physics are the same whether the event is 9.6 minutes away or 9.6 billion light years away.

Still haven’t addressed the issue.

The point I’ve been trying to make here is that an event traveling at light speed will take many billions of years to transit the entire universe, because the current universe is measured at 97B light years across. So I would think this would open an opportunity for observation of the event after it starts, from somewhere that has not yet been directly affected by it. I’m not at all certain about this. The celestial events we currently witness are in the distant past. But wouldn’t the same kind of observations of the event postulated in your OP link, be possible from afar, in the distant future?

I’m still thinking that if the event unfolds at light speed from some unspecified location in our universe, that this would also leave open the possibility of observing its effects on other parts of the universe before it destroys the position of the viewer. Much as the Hubble can currently create images of long ago dying star events in other parts of the universe, wouldn’t the same be true of a theoretical telescope operating in the distant future when this theorized event kicks off in “tens of billions of years from now”? (Thanks to Jeff M for the link)

To be honest, it’s given me a bit trouble trying to figure out how to describe an example, and you have put more than a little doubt in my mind that I am right about it at all. No big deal, I’m often proven wrong, but so far, I have not seen anything yet that convinces me I am incorrect on this.

Read more. When you look at the sun you are seeing what it looked like 8mins ago, when you look at a star 8 billion light years away you are seeing it as it was 8 billion years ago not as it is today. Light travels to the Hubble the Hubble does not zoom to the star. This is how we can see back in time and see what the universe used to look like. So again, if the universe is being destroyed by an event moving at the speed of light we can not see it before it hits us. Poof.

 
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  15893
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
23 February 2013 01:26
 
Hannah2 - 22 February 2013 09:18 PM

But hey, in a billion years, we should probably be able to detect tachyons and dark matter and who knows what else.  We’ll have colonized a bunch of other planets as well as giant starship worlds.  Why are you guys all so pessimistic?

You assume here that there is more to know that will solve the issue but a complete physics model may just say we are fucked.

 
 
hannahtoo
 
Avatar
 
 
hannahtoo
Total Posts:  6079
Joined  15-05-2009
 
 
 
23 February 2013 01:49
 
GAD - 23 February 2013 12:26 AM
Hannah2 - 22 February 2013 09:18 PM

But hey, in a billion years, we should probably be able to detect tachyons and dark matter and who knows what else.  We’ll have colonized a bunch of other planets as well as giant starship worlds.  Why are you guys all so pessimistic?

You assume here that there is more to know that will solve the issue but a complete physics model may just say we are fucked.

I’m not saying we can escape a bubble of another universe overtaking our own.  I’m saying that we might be around in several billion years to experience it.  Others are saying humanity won’t make it that long.

And I still think that the bubble would create a disturbance or distortion or shock wave quite a ways ahead of it that earthlings could detect before the final destruction reached us.  Like if the bubble gobbled up half the Milky Way, would the rest of the galaxy just go on as usual until it was gobbled?  Just you wait and see, GAD!

[ Edited: 23 February 2013 01:58 by hannahtoo]
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  15893
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
23 February 2013 02:10
 
Hannah2 - 23 February 2013 12:49 AM
GAD - 23 February 2013 12:26 AM
Hannah2 - 22 February 2013 09:18 PM

But hey, in a billion years, we should probably be able to detect tachyons and dark matter and who knows what else.  We’ll have colonized a bunch of other planets as well as giant starship worlds.  Why are you guys all so pessimistic?

You assume here that there is more to know that will solve the issue but a complete physics model may just say we are fucked.

I’m not saying we can escape a bubble of another universe overtaking our own.  I’m saying that we might be around in several billion years to experience it.  Others are saying humanity won’t make it that long.

And I still think that the bubble would create a disturbance or distortion or shock wave quite a ways ahead of it that earthlings could detect before the final destruction reached us.

Nope.

Like if the bubble gobbled up half the Milky Way, would the rest of the galaxy just go on as usual until it was gobbled?

Yep.

 
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  15893
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
23 February 2013 02:33
 
gsmonks - 23 February 2013 01:17 AM

The article’s conclusion is somewhat derivative. It has long been understood that matter (our universe and its physical laws) will eventually dissipate.

The article should have been clearer on the involvement of the speed of light, which is the intersection between matter and velocity, and is one of the two points at which matter and the Higg’s field interact (the other being gravity). Given the accelerating expansion of the universe, when the speed of matter matches the speed of light, matter will become a wave-form, and the two will cancel each other out.

Hum, I wasn’t aware that matter could reach light speed, that whole infinite mass deal.

 
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  15893
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
23 February 2013 08:09
 
gsmonks - 23 February 2013 06:16 AM
GAD - 23 February 2013 01:33 AM
gsmonks - 23 February 2013 01:17 AM

The article’s conclusion is somewhat derivative. It has long been understood that matter (our universe and its physical laws) will eventually dissipate.

The article should have been clearer on the involvement of the speed of light, which is the intersection between matter and velocity, and is one of the two points at which matter and the Higg’s field interact (the other being gravity). Given the accelerating expansion of the universe, when the speed of matter matches the speed of light, matter will become a wave-form, and the two will cancel each other out.

Hum, I wasn’t aware that matter could reach light speed, that whole infinite mass deal.

The expansion of the universe is accelerating and the universe will literally accelerate itself to death. As it accelerates, the laws of physics literally get stretched, until the speed of light is reached. As I stated earlier, the speed of light is the intersection between matter and velocity. When that velocity is equal to the speed of light, matter loses its quantum entanglement and becomes a wave-form in the Higg’s field. When all matter reaches this state, the laws of physic as we understand them cease to be, because they are contained in matter and its relation to the Higg’s field.

Matter won’t actually reach the speed of light. In fact, nothing travels at the speed of light. The Higg’s field is a medium through which waves pass, and the end of matter will be like an ice floe being ripped apart with such violence that the ice can’t hold itself together, and will behave like water. Eventually, the level of energy will cause the ice-behaving-like-water to equal its own medium, which is a paradox the laws of physics won’t allow. When this state arises, the two wave-forms cancel each other out.

We’re not talking about matter being accelerated under normal circumstances here. Matter gains mass as it passes through the Higg’s field, and the faster it goes the more mass it gains, hence it would take infinite energy to accelerate mass to the speed of light. But when the Higg’s field itself is expanding at an ever-increasing rate, the laws of physics get stretched. It’s like the difference between moving your hand through the water when the water is stationary and when the water is moving. When the water is stationary, the resistance you encounter is the same in every direction. When the water moves, you don’t notice anything at first because you’re carried along with the current, and the forces you encounter are still equal in every direction. But at high energies, when the water is rushing along at tremendous speeds, eventually you will reach a point where the energy in the water will begin causing you damage, and at infinitely high speeds, you’ll be ripped apart at the subatomic level.

That sounds like the expansion of space (the distance between things increases without them moving) but I’m never heard of the other effects you stated. Do you have a reference for this?

 
 
hannahtoo
 
Avatar
 
 
hannahtoo
Total Posts:  6079
Joined  15-05-2009
 
 
 
23 February 2013 12:01
 

Having lived over 50 years, with an interest in science all my adult life, I’ve read about lots of changes in theories about the universe.  Expansion is slowing, and it will gradually cool down and peter out.  No wait, it’s speeding up and will eventually tear apart.

These ideas are fascinating, and express our scientists’ ever-increasing knowledge.  But do we have any certainty about how the universe began or will end?  The video link above states that two rippling branes combined in the 11th dimension to create our universe.  And now mathematically they can follow time backwards before the Big Bang.  This is all amazing, but who knows?

C’mon GAD.  Nobody KNOWS yet.

 
Jeff M
 
Avatar
 
 
Jeff M
Total Posts:  1644
Joined  08-10-2010
 
 
 
23 February 2013 14:58
 
GAD - 23 February 2013 12:26 AM
Hannah2 - 22 February 2013 09:18 PM

But hey, in a billion years, we should probably be able to detect tachyons and dark matter and who knows what else.  We’ll have colonized a bunch of other planets as well as giant starship worlds.  Why are you guys all so pessimistic?

You assume here that there is more to know that will solve the issue but a complete physics model may just say we are fucked.

I can confidently say that none of us will be around to see a complete physics model which may say we are not fucked.

 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  15893
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
23 February 2013 17:47
 
gsmonks - 23 February 2013 07:55 AM

The Higg’s field IS space. Space isn’t expanding- there’s more OF it pouring into our universe. Space expanding would mean that Higg’s particles are expanding, which they aren’t. New matter is welling up at the same time, but at a much lower rate. The Higg’s field is produced by colliding branes. I’ll see if I can find you a YouTube video that at least partially explains some of this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crQvu4NygAc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ILLQUilpzg

Those didn’t help. But I see the problem. You made your statements as if they were fact when in fact branes and dimensions are simply ideas with no evidence as of yet.  Also space is expanding so your statement there appears incorrect as well.

 
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  15893
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
23 February 2013 17:54
 
Hannah2 - 23 February 2013 11:01 AM

Having lived over 50 years, with an interest in science all my adult life, I’ve read about lots of changes in theories about the universe.  Expansion is slowing, and it will gradually cool down and peter out.  No wait, it’s speeding up and will eventually tear apart.

These ideas are fascinating, and express our scientists’ ever-increasing knowledge.  But do we have any certainty about how the universe began or will end?  The video link above states that two rippling branes combined in the 11th dimension to create our universe.  And now mathematically they can follow time backwards before the Big Bang.  This is all amazing, but who knows?

C’mon GAD.  Nobody KNOWS yet.

Know what? Definitely how the universe will end? That we will discover a way to escape it in the future? Maybe, maybe not. But we do know that if the universe is being gobbled up at light speed that we will never know what hit us.

Ultimate fate of the universe

 
 
Jeff M
 
Avatar
 
 
Jeff M
Total Posts:  1644
Joined  08-10-2010
 
 
 
23 February 2013 22:04
 
GAD - 23 February 2013 04:54 PM
Hannah2 - 23 February 2013 11:01 AM

Having lived over 50 years, with an interest in science all my adult life, I’ve read about lots of changes in theories about the universe.  Expansion is slowing, and it will gradually cool down and peter out.  No wait, it’s speeding up and will eventually tear apart.

These ideas are fascinating, and express our scientists’ ever-increasing knowledge.  But do we have any certainty about how the universe began or will end?  The video link above states that two rippling branes combined in the 11th dimension to create our universe.  And now mathematically they can follow time backwards before the Big Bang.  This is all amazing, but who knows?

C’mon GAD.  Nobody KNOWS yet.

Know what? Definitely how the universe will end? That we will discover a way to escape it in the future? Maybe, maybe not. But we do know that if the universe is being gobbled up at light speed that we will never know what hit us.

Ultimate fate of the universe

This debate my come down to ones definition of “see”.  If you mean see in the sense of light reflecting off of a retina from some event moving at the speed of light, then a human eye likely will not see it.  The article I read quoted the Physicist as saying “this bubble will then expand, basically at the speed of light, and sweep everything before it” The term basically is important here, because even it the bubble is 1% slower, and it started on the other side of the universe, and if light reflected off it, or it generated light some kind of way, I would think we would see it quite a few years before it hit.

There are also other ways of “seeing”, for instance, assuming, in 5b years or so, we have this complete physics model you posit, we will likely be measuring this Higgs field stuff out-the-wazoo and will likely know exactly where and when the phenomena will begin and end.  The field measurements and models will be our way of seeing the damn thing wink

 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  15893
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
23 February 2013 22:43
 
Jeff M - 23 February 2013 09:04 PM
GAD - 23 February 2013 04:54 PM
Hannah2 - 23 February 2013 11:01 AM

Having lived over 50 years, with an interest in science all my adult life, I’ve read about lots of changes in theories about the universe.  Expansion is slowing, and it will gradually cool down and peter out.  No wait, it’s speeding up and will eventually tear apart.

These ideas are fascinating, and express our scientists’ ever-increasing knowledge.  But do we have any certainty about how the universe began or will end?  The video link above states that two rippling branes combined in the 11th dimension to create our universe.  And now mathematically they can follow time backwards before the Big Bang.  This is all amazing, but who knows?

C’mon GAD.  Nobody KNOWS yet.

Know what? Definitely how the universe will end? That we will discover a way to escape it in the future? Maybe, maybe not. But we do know that if the universe is being gobbled up at light speed that we will never know what hit us.

Ultimate fate of the universe

This debate my come down to ones definition of “see”.  If you mean see in the sense of light reflecting off of a retina from some event moving at the speed of light, then a human eye likely will not see it.  The article I read quoted the Physicist as saying “this bubble will then expand, basically at the speed of light, and sweep everything before it” The term basically is important here, because even it the bubble is 1% slower, and it started on the other side of the universe, and if light reflected off it, or it generated light some kind of way, I would think we would see it quite a few years before it hit.

Yes at 1% slower and starting 5 billion light years away we would get a 50 million year warning. But in this thread we were discussing events at light speed and we wouldn’t see those coming and that seems to confuse some people.

There are also other ways of “seeing”, for instance, assuming, in 5b years or so, we have this complete physics model you posit, we will likely be measuring this Higgs field stuff out-the-wazoo and will likely know exactly where and when the phenomena will begin and end.  The field measurements and models will be our way of seeing the damn thing wink

Well if we are here in 5 billion years and have been advancing the whole time then maybe so. But if we haven’t found a way to leave this universe by then then all it will tell us is when we are going to die, not much of a win.

[ Edited: 23 February 2013 23:00 by GAD]
 
 
Jeff M
 
Avatar
 
 
Jeff M
Total Posts:  1644
Joined  08-10-2010
 
 
 
23 February 2013 22:57
 
GAD - 23 February 2013 09:43 PM

Well if we are here in 5 billion years and have been advancing the whole time then maybe so. But if we haven’t found a way to leave this universe by then then all it will tell us is when we are going to die, not much of a win.

Too bad we won’t be around to see it.  I would gladly buy you a bag of popcorn if you would join me to watch the fireworks!  If we could see them, that is.

 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  15893
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
23 February 2013 22:59
 
Jeff M - 23 February 2013 09:57 PM
GAD - 23 February 2013 09:43 PM

Well if we are here in 5 billion years and have been advancing the whole time then maybe so. But if we haven’t found a way to leave this universe by then then all it will tell us is when we are going to die, not much of a win.

Too bad we won’t be around to see it.  I would gladly buy you a bag of popcorn if you would join me to watch the fireworks!  If we could see them, that is.

And I would gladly bring the beer, a lot of it.

[ Edited: 24 February 2013 01:49 by GAD]
 
 
 < 1 2 3 4 >