Universe

[Robbo]

I think that the bubble within a bubble is how it seems to best, that we live inside a unstable bubble with edges which fluctuate on MASSIVE levels, while trying to get itself to the strongest shape ( a perfect sphere )

Our bubble floats around in the "nothingness" with many other bubbles, and when they bump with each other they merge and make our known universe larger.

Bon, add a 'g' to your name and put it down mate

 

[spangley_special]

I think it stated that this sterile energy-less universe

You cannot get an energy-less universe as energy can be neither used up or destroyed it always exists and can only be converted from one form to another

 

[Bon]

Bon, add a 'g' to your name and put it down mate

it works for me!


The theory that is, not the bong

 

[Robbo]

I watched a Horizon type program once where it is said that the theory of the universe expanding/contracting may well end up being mute as far as the continuity of the human race is concerned, as there is only a limited amount of energy in the universe and the cycle of stars being born to create other stars / heavy elements / etc, will end at some point becuase all the ready fuel for stars will be used up. Subsequently end of life as we know it (Jim).

I think it stated that this sterile energy-less universe will happen before the universe begins to contract again ready for the next big bang, but re-assuringly the big bang it will give it a fresh start, and repeatedly so.

Mind hurts when I think of the fact that outside of our universe there is nothing, as surely this nothing must be contained within something else?

I'll play devil's advocate here; the amount of energy in the universe has always, and will always be the same, it's conserved mate; this is one of the fundamental truths of our universe just as the speed of light can't be exceeded.

It looks like you are getting confused here with two different, and actually conflicting scenarios.

Firstly, the sterile universe as you call it whereby all the stars all burn out etc will only happen if we continue to expand; if this happens, then there will be no ultimate contraction and therefore no big crunch.

And so, we can't have that sterile universe AND an ultimate big crunch, we get one or the other, leastiwse thats my understanding of it all.

Our existence in all this is academic I'm afraid .......

 

[Robbo]

it works for me!


The theory that is, not the bong

Bon, if that theory works for you mate, then you really need to take a long hard pull on that pipe ....and get it right down there in the lungs........keep it there for about 20 seconds and gradually let it out ......do that on another 5 occasions and then you can create another theory that will undoubtedly supersede the one you have at present

 

[John C]

You cannot get an energy-less universe as energy can be neither used up or destroyed it always exists and can only be converted from one form to another

But if there was none to begin with? Does that mean its not a universe? (hypotetically)




Marcus I think the current theory is the 'sterile universe' as you put it.

Our 'best' theory predicts the universe will continue to expand to the point where there will be no stars visible in the sky and no effect of gravity between one peice of matter and another.

Thats gonna take infinite time of course. But we shoud be patient

 

[TEKLOFTY]

Bon, if that theory works for you mate, then you really need to take a long hard pull on that pipe ....and get it right down there in the lungs........keep it there for about 20 seconds and gradually let it out ......do that on another 5 occasions and then you can create another theory that will undoubtedly supersede the one you have at present

If Bon is referring to what I think he is referring to then the membrane theory which is in itself an extension of the already established string theory sounds very plausible to me.

 

[scott_peters]

Actually, the universe is made up of galaxies, of which, they are made up of stars, planets, asteroids, meteors, huge big-ass gas clouds that can be zillions of miles across and Tottenham supporters....

On average, there are hundreds of billoins of stars in a galaxy and there are hundreds of billions of galaxies; our star system has 9 planets whizzing around it, just think of the possible number of planets in the universe (after those number of stars and galaxies I have just mentioned) and it is statistically impossible for us to be the only living inhabitants ...well, as close to impossible as you can get.

I don't think these threads are gonna be enhanced by any Google experts because they can be spotted a mile off and so please refrain from cutting and pasting Wikipedia extracts .......but there is one thing I found quite fascinating because classical opinions had the rate of expansion of the universe decreasing but, it was found to be increasing ......if so, WTF is causing that acceleration into oblivion ...food for thought maybe?

COME ON YOU SPURS lol

 

[Buddha 3]

Could it not simply be that we are still at the early stages of the universe's current cycle and that the expansion will only begin to slow in a few hundred or thousand millennia. Now dont get me wrong i make no claim to having and real knowledge of the subject (not that this ignorance is a real issue, as it is all so far out of my hands what happens that my understanding is pretty trivial either way).
But I am aware of the sheer scale of it all, and to my uneducated reasoning this seems like a valid idea.

Not as crazy as it sounds...

If we liken the Big Bang to an explosion, anything blasted out from the explosion will go through a (very) brief moment of acceleration, before the far longer process of slowing down (after the force driving it forwards dissipates).

So, on that notion, could the reason that the expansion of the universe is (still) accelerating be because we are still within that utterly brief moment? We are in the bright flash, rather than in the big, billowing, fiery mushroom cloud? All timed on a cosmic scale obviously...

 

[spangley_special]

Not as crazy as it sounds...

If we liken the Big Bang to an explosion, anything blasted out from the explosion will go through a (very) brief moment of acceleration, before the far longer process of slowing down (after the force driving it forwards dissipates).

So, on that notion, could the reason that the expansion of the universe is (still) accelerating be because we are still within that utterly brief moment? We are in the bright flash, rather than in the big, billowing, fiery mushroom cloud? All timed on a cosmic scale obviously...

pretty much exactly what i meant, cheers B man