The universe will end and Re-Start again

[Tajir]

...What do you think about the below:
---------------------


Please, don't go insane now. Of all the apocalypses on this site, the one you’re about to read is probably the most mind-boggling of them all. For what will eternity look like? Think of a place where everything has ceased to exist, where golden parkings pop out of nowhere, Napoleon Bonaparte comes back to life and the Twin Towers resurrect themselves. Still, this incredible place is exactly where we are heading, physicists expect.


Empty your mind. We’re about to take a BIG leap into the future. Not just a lousy few billions of years, but 10 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 years!

One ‘googol’ years, is the official word for that number. It’s the current age of the Universe, one billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion times over. Squeeze the entire history of our Universe into the thickness of a dollar bill, and one googol years would give you a pile of money that reaches one hundred quadrillion quadrillion quadrillion quadrillion light years high. It wouldn’t even fit in our Universe.

One googol years. That’s truly staggering. Beyond anything a human can comprehend.

First, let’s fast-forward to the not-so-awfully-far future. For the coming billions of years, scientists predict quite a ride. The Sun will explode, the Milky Way will slam into another galaxy. The Cosmos might collapse, or get torn apart -- scientists can’t seem to decide yet which is more likely. And even if the Universe doesn’t do that, we’re destined to face a weird and horrible crisis, which involves us spending our lifetime as sleeping robots.

The problem is that the Universe gets bigger and cooler. Ever since the Big Bang, it expands, much like an expanding ball of fire after an explosion. Right now, the Universe is still young. It has these cute stars and twinkling galaxies. But in the long run, that will change. Slowly but inevitably, the Universe will empty itself.

Big Nothing: Eventually, the Universe will become a dark, sterile place

First, the galaxies will fly out of sight, beyond the horizon of what we can possibly see. Next, the stars in our own galaxy will burn out, one after the other. The only thing that will remain, is a dull graveyard of cold planets, dead suns and black holes. In about one hundred trillion years, the Milky Way will go black, astronomers expect.

And eventually, even this graveyard decays. One after the other, the dead stars and planets are eaten by black holes, or kicked out of the Milky Way by collisions. Astronomers expect that in one hundred to one thousand billion billion years, our galaxy has dissolved completely.

Time goes on. After a while (more trillions of years) something else will kick in. You’ll notice that even the very stuff nature is made of, isn’t stable. A proton, the particle you’ll find in the core of atoms, has an average lifetime of 100 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 years. Wait long enough, and it will suddenly vanish. Poof, gone. The same goes for light particles, the so-called ‘photons’. They’re expected to last a few zero’s longer, but in the end, they too will kick the bucket, one after the other. Isn’t that just bizarre? The light will go out, literally.

The last thing that survives, are the black holes. But in the end, they too will vanish. They will evaporate in a puff of radiation.

So there we are, at our unimaginable one googol years. Finally, the Universe is totally and utterly empty. You won’t see any light or spot any planet -- in fact, you won’t even find the tiniest speck of dust. The Universe has sterilized itself. All there is left, is emptiness, and darkness. Total oblivion. And worst of all: there’s nothing we can do to stop it. We can build fancy machines or futuristic devices all we like -- but in the end, they’ll all get kicked out of existence, when the matter they are made of simply vanishes.

So there you have it: infinity. Booooring, we must add.

But don’t sob. There’s an upside.

As the quadrillions of years pass by, something very odd should happen. In eternity, even the rarest events get a chance to occur. Weird, bizarre phenomena that only happen once in a zillion years or so, become quite normal.

For example: the nothingness should yield a few surprises. Already, physicists know that in a vacuum, there are sometimes tiny little energy ‘blobs’. Little, random fluctuations of the so-called ‘quantum vacuum’. Out of nowhere, tiny particles pop in and out of existence. But theory predicts that on very, VERY rare occasions, the fluctuations should be a bit larger. Out of nowhere, an entire atom might appear! Or hey, the vacuum may even spit out a few of them!

Think of it like the static on TV. Wait long enough, and out of the random fuzz, a recognizable image might materialize. Wait REALLY long, and one day a complete episode of The Bold And The Beautiful should accidentally show up!

In the vastness of eternity, even things that are almost impossible become real. Like the sudden appearance of, say, a light green buste of Napoleon Bonaparte.

In the Universe, this should give some really surprising results. With eternity at hand, the vacuum should begin to yield all kinds of objects. Incoherent lumps of random garbage, most of the time. But on very, very rare occasions, you’ll see other objects popping into existence. The Eiffel tower. A purple camel. A golden parking garage filled with chocolate Cadillacs. Napoleon Bonaparte sitting next to Mike Tyson on top of a stack of comic books. As the googols of years pass by, it’s all there.

In the VERY, VERY, VERY long run, the vacuum will even belch up complete planets, and beautiful stars, burning and all. Theoretically the vacuum should even churn out a complete solar system one day, identical to ours, with a planet Earth inhabited by people. "In an infinite amount of time, one day, I will reappear", as physicist Katherine Freese of Michigan University once put it. "An crazy thought, but true."

One day the black nothingness should even produce a new Big Bang. Admittedly, we’ll have wait really long for it to happen. Researchers of the University of Chicago once tried to calculate it. And according to their best estimates, it should happen somewhere over the next 1 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 years. That’s a one with 1056 zero’s. You can count them, if you like.

[Elfdude]

For example: the nothingness should yield a few surprises. Already, physicists know that in a vacuum, there are sometimes tiny little energy ‘blobs’. Little, random fluctuations of the so-called ‘quantum vacuum’. Out of nowhere, tiny particles pop in and out of existence. But theory predicts that on very, VERY rare occasions, the fluctuations should be a bit larger. Out of nowhere, an entire atom might appear! Or hey, the vacuum may even spit out a few of them!

I don't have a problem until you reach this point. The quantum fluctuations of a vacuum continuously interact with each other producing what is called negative energy. One of the most interesting properties of negative energy is it falls up instead of down. The way I see it, after dark energy is equalized by negative energy long after the stars have gone silent negative energy will begin to pull the universe back together in a big crunch. Everything will coalesce back to the size of the singularity and smaller until our universe literally pops out of existence like a bubble. Or on the other hand negative energy never beats out dark energy and the universe expands past it's own boundaries until the fabric of spacetime itself is ripped apart obliterating anything that might've survived. The flip side is that our own universe dying might give rise to new universes being born.

A second big bang, (caused by intense heat/pressure that litterally causes time and space to boil) would not explode in our universe. Instead if the conditions were right it might give rise to an entirely new universe outside of our own. Big bang explosions are too enormous for space and time to contain thus they create their own space time.

Nothing does have given instability but the time line for that to occur is like you said enormous. It's doubtful that our universe would survive that long.

[Gordon Freynman]

Indeed the universe appears to have a bleak future, and while what you're saying could happen is technically correct, the universe is likely to be gone before it does, or anything that did appear wouldn't last long. Our universe appears to be doomed to either eventually collapse on it self, or expand forever faster like a runaway train on a downward slope that goes to infinity; it ends in a big crunch or a big rip. If it ends in a crunch, it will probably happen before anything like a planet could spring up. If it ends in a rip, then eventually space will be expanding so fast that it will overcome the strong nuclear force and rip all matter apart, and if anything like a planet were to pop up it would instantly disintegrate.

On the other hand, the universe might not collapse on itself or expand forever faster. It's expansion could slow down and approach a state of equilibrium, and assuming nothing catastrophic happens then theoretically everything you just said could happen. Really though, it's pretty much all just speculation. There is so much we know now about nature, but at the same time we know oh so little.

[Niles Crane]

The fortunate part of your theory is that no one could possibly disprove it. Despite that, I still think it's a bit silly.

[Arch-hereticK]

It certainly seems quite likely.

[Tankbuster]

As physicist Kurt Vonnegut summarised it while giving a speech in a girls' school : "Things are going to get unimaginably worse, and they are never ever going to get better again"
After this statement Krauss' agent also suggested that a better title for this speech might have been: "Why we're all ed."

[Gelgoog]

I beleive in the ever expansion theory where everything spread so far out that you won't even have solar systems any more. All life will have long died out prior to this point. The end of life will come when the last star in the universe dies.

[Marie Louise von Preussen]

All I've read, including studies of what was there before the Big Bang, state that matter will miraculously emerge from "nothing" ("dark energy") and re-create a new Universe again.

[Gordon Freynman]

All I've read, including studies of what was there before the Big Bang, state that matter will miraculously emerge from "nothing" ("dark energy") and re-create a new Universe again.

I highly doubt they were "studies", more likely they were speculations. With our current understanding, to study anything "before" the Big Bang is impossible. Also, we know virtually nothing of the nature of dark energy, so I'm not sure how anyone can come to the conclusion that a new universe can spring out from it.

[Strelok]

All I've read, including studies of what was there before the Big Bang

Before the big bang, the universe was in a quantum state. An interesting lecture on things related to this can be viewed below. Note that the term "nothing" is used loosely. When something is described as nothing by a physicist, that does not account for the fact that quantum fields still exist within what they call nothing.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Sure, every effect has a cause, but that doesn't mean they have a purpose.

Not necessarily true. Causality breaks down at the sub-atomic level. Virtual particles (though some people might contest my use of a plural and say that virtual particles don't exist in pairs) for example, jump in and out of existence without a cause

[Gordon Freynman]

Not necessarily true. Causality breaks down at the sub-atomic level. Virtual particles (though some people might contest my use of a plural and say that virtual particles don't exist in pairs) for example, jump in and out of existence without a cause

I'm very much aware of this, just didn't feel going into that little detail was necessary.

Although I could say virtual particles are caused by the...UNCERTAINTY PRINCIPLE!!! DUN DUN DUN.

Faster than light travel can be accomplished via negative energy which pulls space together rather than deforming it positive energy does. Protons would not collapse within said bubble as they'd be independent of the pressures outside. For all intents and purposes this type of FTL travel would be immune to the macro effects of the end of the universe. I see no reason to believe however that the quantum particles which appear everywhere always would ever diminish.

Not too sure that would work, but I'll have to give it a bit more thought.

Spacetime foam can accomplish this unfortunately we'd be thrust into a universe undergoing the aftermath of a big bang. We first have to master time travel progress past it, and then alternate time stream travel and progress even past that to finally cross the boundaries into a universe which would not be in the process of ending.

I was referring jumping into an already existing universe in the hypothetical multiverse

But the method you mention could maybe work without any need for time traveling, if we could maintain a wormhole to a baby universe for several hundreds of thousands of years, by which time the new universe would settle down and stars and galaxies could form. (this is all assuming that every universe that forms has the same physical laws etc.)

i dont want to embarrass myself by sounding like an idiot, as i recently failed earth science, but if this bizarre and extremely confusing theory is correct, does this mean that i have already lived my life and i am now living it again........ and in about one google years ill live it again?

According to the OP, you yourself wouldn't be living, but someone exactly like you would be.

and what in the is it talking about with all this purple camels and ?

Technical speak for "weird will happen" I guess?

[Syron]

Time goes on. After a while (more trillions of years) something else will kick in. You’ll notice that even the very stuff nature is made of, isn’t stable. A proton, the particle you’ll find in the core of atoms, has an average lifetime of 100 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 years. Wait long enough, and it will suddenly vanish. Poof, gone.

Really?

Have you seen a Proton decay? Because no scientist ever has………

Indeed the lowest bound on the possible figure for a proton lifetime is now longer than our best particle physics theories predict.

The same goes for light particles, the so-called ‘photons’. They’re expected to last a few zero’s longer, but in the end, they too will kick the bucket, one after the other. Isn’t that just bizarre? The light will go out, literally.

Similar to the above, Photons are stable, they do not decay. In fact in the case of photons this is even more firm as they do not experience the passage of time!

The quantum fluctuations of a vacuum continuously interact with each other producing what is called negative energy.

They do?

I believe you are confusing this with Dark Energy which, if present ideas are right and is related to the Cosmological Constant, is itself the Vacuum Energy of the universe.

The way I see it, after dark energy is equalized by negative energy long after the stars have gone silent negative energy will begin to pull the universe back together in a big crunch.

Negative Energy, well in relation to Cosmology anyway, is related to the concept of negative matter and negative mass density. Not exactly sure how this is supposed to “equalise” Dark Energy.

A second big bang, (caused by intense heat/pressure that litterally causes time and space to boil) would not explode in our universe. Instead if the conditions were right it might give rise to an entirely new universe outside of our own. Big bang explosions are too enormous for space and time to contain thus they create their own space time.

Nothing does have given instability but the time line for that to occur is like you said enormous. It's doubtful that our universe would survive that long.

The Big Bang was an explosion?

No the “Big Bang” was an event thought to have occurred around 13.7 billion years ago. Whatever happened at this time, which no one really knows, since then the very fabric of the universe has been expanding.

So you are right, another “Big Bang” inside the universe would not work, but not for the reason you posit. Temperature or scale has nothing to do with it. The Big Bang was a phase of the universe itself; it is not an “explosion” “within” anything in our space-time, it is a point in space-time.

[Elfdude]

I believe you are confusing this with Dark Energy which, if present ideas are right and is related to the Cosmological Constant, is itself the Vacuum Energy of the universe.

I may be wrong, I don't know much about quantum mechanics, however a harvard experiment with vacuum energy (a gold plate and a gold ball on a hinge) was supposed to be on negative energy not dark energy.

Negative Energy, well in relation to Cosmology anyway, is related to the concept of negative matter and negative mass density. Not exactly sure how this is supposed to “equalise” Dark Energy.

At odds with how it was explained by Michio Kaku but I have no idea what his credentials are as a cosmologist.

The Big Bang was an explosion?

Explosion - Noun - a violent expansion or bursting with noise. Don't debate semantics with me please you understood my meaning.

No the “Big Bang” was an event thought to have occurred around 13.7 billion years ago. Whatever happened at this time, which no one really knows, since then the very fabric of the universe has been expanding.

Indeed, it is thought that you can trigger this by heating an area of space to the point that it litterally boils. Much hotter than anything encountered since the big bang.

So you are right, another “Big Bang” inside the universe would not work, but not for the reason you posit. Temperature or scale has nothing to do with it. The Big Bang was a phase of the universe itself; it is not an “explosion” “within” anything in our space-time, it is a point in space-time.

I was utilizing the terminology to explain it to someone who can't wrap their head around it. Were another big bang to happen it would not be within our universe, it would create its own. However that doesn't mean scientists don't have an idea on how to create another big bang from our universe.

[Gordon Freynman]

I may be wrong, I don't know much about quantum mechanics, however a harvard experiment with vacuum energy (a gold plate and a gold ball on a hinge) was supposed to be on negative energy not dark energy.

I think you might be confusing negative energy with negative pressure.

Explosion - Noun - a violent expansion or bursting with noise. Don't debate semantics with me please you understood my meaning.

Well, the Big Bang was noiseless, so by that definition it isn't an explosion.

To call the Big Bang an "explosion" is a gross understatement anyways.

Indeed, it is thought that you can trigger this by heating an area of space to the point that it litterally boils. Much hotter than anything encountered since the big bang.

I've never heard this before, do you have a link to an article or something? Nevertheless, you don't really need to heat up space to make it boil. If you go down to small enough scales into the quantum world, space becomes a boiling, foaming place of chaos anyways.

[Elfdude]

I think you might be confusing negative energy with negative pressure.

No: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casimir_effect You are right it does exert a negative pressure but it's not unrelated to negative energy. Nor am I talking about dark energy.

http://openseti.org/Docs/HotsonPart1.pdf

It was performed by the Capasso group at Harvard

Well, the Big Bang was noiseless, so by that definition it isn't an explosion.

To call the Big Bang an "explosion" is a gross understatement anyways.

Or is the key word there. A sudden expansion is all that's required to be defined as an explosion. I really hate people who debate semantics when it's very easy to understand what I meant.

I've never heard this before, do you have a link to an article or something? Nevertheless, you don't really need to heat up space to make it boil. If you go down to small enough scales into the quantum world, space becomes a boiling, foaming place of chaos anyways.

Michio Kaku explained it in a lecture. It's theoretical of course but from the math if we imagine a glass furnace at 2000 degrees C, then multiply that by a trillion then multiply that by a trillion we come close to the temperatures required to literally 'boil space'. These temperatures cause a spacetime foam because at such high temperatures even space breaks down the result is thought to be another big bang that creates it's own baby universe where the laws of physics might be different than our own. I wish I could remember the scientist he quoted for it but attempting to google search the article isn't coming up with much.

Here's some information on it vaguely related: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spacetime_foam

[Lordinquisitor]

You should quote the site you got this from..

http://www.exitmundi.nl/exitmundi.htm

There are some other funny theories out there.

[TOLAROscipii]

what is on the other side of the universe ?

how can it expand unless there is space to expand


another thing
why are black holes so pointless?

[Elfdude]

what is on the other side of the universe ?

how can it expand unless there is space to expand

We are 3 dimensional beings. The multiverse includes some other 9 dimensions. Space is not an issue, they are infinitely apart and yet completely on top of each other, we simply cannot perceive this.

another thing
why are black holes so pointless?

What do you mean pointless?

[TOLAROscipii]

They seem to be complete 100% destruction
how could such a pointless thing exist

[Gordon Freynman]

They seem to be complete 100% destruction
how could such a pointless thing exist

Black holes exist because according to the laws of nature that's what happens when a big enough star blows up. Nothing needs a point to exist.