FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


how universe is formed and expanding





tukun2009manit
what will be the consiquence of big bang will we all die or still there any solution to this problem
ocalhoun
Two possibilities:
1- hot death: gravity stops the expansion of the universe and pulls it all back together into one tiny, uber-dense, very hot speck of existence, perhaps to explode again into another big bang, which will start the universe over again.
2- cold death: entropy takes its course, and eventually there is no usable concentration of energy anywhere in the universe. Life requires energy.

There are no known ways to avoid these, but humans will probably be extinct long before either one happens anyway.

Two theories about how to escape these inevitable ends:
1- Hide in another dimension or an alternate universe
2 (cold death only): Use a special kind of radiation from the event horizon of black holes, which should never run out, to sustain life.
psleang
ocalhoun wrote:
2 (cold death only): Use a special kind of radiation from the event horizon of black holes, which should never run out, to sustain life.


Even Bekenstein-Hawking radiation from black holes will eventually run out. As the black holes radiate this energy they slowly evaporate, since their mass is being converted into the radiant energy. Even the largest black holes will eventually disappear, though it will take a very, very long time. As far as we currently know, the largest black holes will be the last useful sources of energy to disappear from the universe. Very depressing, isn't it?
ocalhoun
psleang wrote:
since their mass is being converted into the radiant energy.

Didn't think that was the way it worked...

Thought that random vacuum fluctuations which would normally cancel out back to nothing, when near the event horizon, would sometimes not be able to cancel out because some of the particles involved would fall into the black hole, leaving the free un-canceled particles to radiate out, and perhaps be collected and harvested for energy.

How would this eventually destroy the black hole? I figured black holes were pretty much eternal, because no mass or energy could ever leave them; they could only grow larger, not smaller.
psleang
To Ocalhoun:

Wikipedia sums up the theories nicely, but the short version is that those vacuum fluctuations can only become "real" particles by stealing a little of the black hole's energy/mass. Hawking's theory makes some assumptions and Hawking radiation has never been observed, but even if the theory is wrong, I'm sure the Universe has SOME means of destroying black holes... Given enough time, entropy always wins.
nanunath
Dont worry!
Life on earth will b vanished much much before that kinda incident... Laughing
blackhole365
I actually read that the universe would evolve in 2 different ways:
- The Big Freeze, when all the stars lose the hydrogen and the universe would be just weavy elements, like Fe, C, ...
- The Big Crunch, which would be the very opposite of Big Bang
=)
orkutthemes
I've read the big bang theory and find it quite relative to why it's expanding
but the point is that "you can not create something from nothing"
there must be a negative form of energy or mass,such as to nutrilize the existing energy.
maybe that's a netures secrat.
ocalhoun
orkutthemes wrote:

but the point is that "you can not create something from nothing"

But was it created at all?
What if it was always there? The possibility becomes more tangible if you consider the possibility that time is a circular loop, not an infinite straight line. (Which would require a second temporal dimension, but why not have one?)
anarhistu
ocalhoun wrote:
orkutthemes wrote:

but the point is that "you can not create something from nothing"

But was it created at all?
What if it was always there? The possibility becomes more tangible if you consider the possibility that time is a circular loop, not an infinite straight line. (Which would require a second temporal dimension, but why not have one?)


I think the ideea is the same. What if it was always there? But if it was always there, when and how did it started in the first place? Cannot be "always" something that cannot be.... Plus, if you consider the time as a circular loop, which in my opinion is impossible, we must understand how and when it formed in the first place... or, if we consider that energy is 0, what gaved the energy the "power" to "show" itself as existence? When and why? The time cannot be considered as a circular loop, because once the time started, it will never end.
Even if the entire univers will end, the time will not stop. It will just become meaningless.... If there is no space and no matter, the time has just no reason. The time is just the way of showing the existance of all energy forms.
ocalhoun
anarhistu wrote:
The time cannot be considered as a circular loop, because once the time started, it will never end.


A circle never ends.

As for how the circle got there to begin with, how did any of the dimensions get there to begin with?
Thinking that things must have a beginning might just be a human misconception, based on everything we deal with on a day-to-day basis having a beginning.

Curiously though, you seem to assume time must have no end... How can you insist that it stretch infinitely forward, yet find it inconceivable for it to stretch infinitely backward?

I consider it likely that all the dimensions we know of (3 spatial and 1 temporal) are circular, thereby being finite, yet having no beginning or end.
Of course, I have no evidence for this but the elegance of that solution (in that it nicely solves the questions of 'what's beyond the edge of the universe?' and 'how did the universe begin?')... they could all be infinite straight lines, or finite straight lines.

Quote:
But if it was always there, when and how did it started in the first place?

I see you have the usual human limitations when thinking about the infinite. If it was always there, it does not require a way that it got started, because it never did start.
anarhistu
ocalhoun wrote:
anarhistu wrote:
The time cannot be considered as a circular loop, because once the time started, it will never end.


A circle never ends.

As for how the circle got there to begin with, how did any of the dimensions get there to begin with?
Thinking that things must have a beginning might just be a human misconception, based on everything we deal with on a day-to-day basis having a beginning.

Curiously though, you seem to assume time must have no end... How can you insist that it stretch infinitely forward, yet find it inconceivable for it to stretch infinitely backward?

Maybe you are right, and maybe I "do not see long enough".... But, you explanation is the "scientific" explanation, same as the priests explanations: "God is everything, he has no beginning and no end"... Same, you say, "The time and the space are infinite"... If the time and space are infinite, then please explain why the speed of light is limited... And this question is not rhetorical, is real. Maybe it is a dumb question, but I put this question with a reason.
[/quote]
I consider it likely that all the dimensions we know of (3 spatial and 1 temporal) are circular, thereby being finite, yet having no beginning or end.
Of course, I have no evidence for this but the elegance of that solution (in that it nicely solves the questions of 'what's beyond the edge of the universe?' and 'how did the universe begin?')... they could all be infinite straight lines, or finite straight lines.

Quote:
But if it was always there, when and how did it started in the first place?

I see you have the usual human limitations when thinking about the infinite. If it was always there, it does not require a way that it got started, because it never did start.[/quote]

The human limitation is in all of us... Nobody can say that he/she does not have the "human limitation"... It is in our blood. Analyzing your explanation, if the universe is finite but has no beginning or end, it must have a start... All finite things must have a start.. If it has no "start", then you can not say it is finite.... Think about this and then analyze the expression "universe finite but without beginning or end" It is true... A ball can be finite but without beginning or end. But this, only if you look on the surface... in 2 dimensions... But we have 3 dimension.
ocalhoun
anarhistu wrote:
ocalhoun wrote:
anarhistu wrote:
The time cannot be considered as a circular loop, because once the time started, it will never end.


A circle never ends.

As for how the circle got there to begin with, how did any of the dimensions get there to begin with?
Thinking that things must have a beginning might just be a human misconception, based on everything we deal with on a day-to-day basis having a beginning.

Curiously though, you seem to assume time must have no end... How can you insist that it stretch infinitely forward, yet find it inconceivable for it to stretch infinitely backward?

Maybe you are right, and maybe I "do not see long enough".... But, you explanation is the "scientific" explanation, same as the priests explanations: "God is everything, he has no beginning and no end"... Same, you say, "The time and the space are infinite"... If the time and space are infinite, then please explain why the speed of light is limited... And this question is not rhetorical, is real. Maybe it is a dumb question, but I put this question with a reason.

Most explanations will finally fall back on the '____' had no beginning, it was always there, because that's the only easily understandable way to end questions like "so, what happened before that?"

Why is the speed of light related to the in/finite character of the universe?

Why not ask instead, "Why is the gravitational constant not infinite?"
Quote:

All finite things must have a start.. If it has no "start", then you can not say it is finite....

See this circle?

It is obviously of finite dimensions, yet the line is infinite, because it repeats endlessly, with no definable start or end points.
We can measure the finite distance around the circle, but only if we define an arbitrary start/stop point.
Likewise, if my idea of time is correct, you could measure how long the universe goes before repeating, but only if you measure from an arbitrary start/stop time.
Quote:

Think about this and then analyze the expression "universe finite but without beginning or end" It is true... A ball can be finite but without beginning or end. But this, only if you look on the surface... in 2 dimensions... But we have 3 dimension.

So, where are the beginning and end points on a 3D ball?
Rolling Eyes
Related topics
science vs. religion
Unintelligent Design
Why do you all hate God?
Can anyone tell me about Dark Matter
2nd LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS
Was Eve the first Woman?
Is Universe really expanding?
WILL universe ever end?
What is the universe expanding into?
Why did God create humans?
Dark Energy?
How did the universe come to be, if there is no God?
The Scale of the Universe
God, the Universe, and Everything...
Age of the universe and observable universe
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Science -> The Universe

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.