The Big Crunch

[KholdStunner]

i just found out about this theory, and i find it very interesting. Does anyone have any information about it?

 

eventually the universe will stop expanding and rapidly decrease in size, and eventually a 'reverse-big-bang' will happen?

[5614]

The idea is that if there's enough mass within the universe the gravity between all the masses will become stronger than the original expanding-velocity given to the masses from the big bang.

 

This means that slowly expansion will slow down and everything will come together again.

 

Quite what happens then is more theories. It could all just get a bit mashed up and it'd be a wasted universe... it could form into what was there before the big bang... from then the big bang could occur again and you'd get a cycle of universes.

[KholdStunner]

If the reverse-big-bang theory is 'wrong' then this universe MIGHT be in deep trouble. The reason being: if the universe kept expanding, then eventually the stars that populate the universe will decrease (because 1 star dying doesnt mean 1 star being born) and eventually most of the stars will burn out and the universe will be nothing but an huge, cold, peice of nothingness. No species would ever be able to survive.

 

does any1 have a response to this theory???

[J.C.MacSwell]

If the reverse-big-bang theory is 'wrong' then this universe MIGHT be in deep trouble. The reason being: if the universe kept expanding' date=' then eventually the stars that populate the universe will decrease (because 1 star dying doesnt mean 1 star being born) and eventually most of the stars will burn out and the universe will be nothing but an huge, cold, peice of nothingness. No species would ever be able to survive.

 

does any1 have a response to this theory???[/quote']

 

Welcome to entropy.

[KholdStunner]

explain, please.

[Bettina]

explain, please.

 

Nothing to explain really. The "present" thinking is that there is not enough dark energy to stop the expansion. The universe will keep on expanding and will not reverse, crunch, and be reborn. (the oscillating universe).

 

This means the stars will eventually use up there fuel and burn out. The distances between matter will continue to increase. The universe will end up at or near absolute zero and there will be no light. It will be a very cold, dark, and dead place. Even gravity will eventually decay.

 

Personally, I think its all baloney. Even after this dead universe continues on, Somewhere another quark will pop in and another universe will be born.

 

Bettina

[[Tycho?]]

Nothing to explain really. The "present" thinking is that there is not enough dark energy to stop the expansion. The universe will keep on expanding and will not reverse' date=' crunch, and be reborn. (the oscillating universe).

 

This means the stars will eventually use up there fuel and burn out. The distances between matter will continue to increase. The universe will end up at or near absolute zero and there will be no light. It will be a very cold, dark, and dead place. Even gravity will eventually decay.

 

Personally, I think its all baloney. Even after this dead universe continues on, Somewhere another quark will pop in and another universe will be born.

 

Bettina[/quote']

 

Gravity will decay? Do you mean matter would decay?

[Bettina]

That was mentioned in an article I read about the death of the universe. It was trillions and trillions of years after the last light of the universe went out. At that point it said even matter will begin to decay. I'm looking for that article now.

 

Bettina

[[Tycho?]]

Then that I agree with, even protons are said to decay, although it could take 10^35 or 10^36 years for this to happen. If it happens at all.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton_decay

[Astroreeper]

I have been pondering something for many years.

 

I can't be sure looking at the facts that have crossed my path, that the universe is indeed expanding without doubt.

I understand the Doppler shift, but in analysis could it not be that it only appears that our universe is expanding, when in fact we are moving faster toward the center of our universe. And of course those bodies closer to the center would be moving even faster.

And if this was to be, would it not explain why most of our universe is apparently missing?

This would please me very much as some of the rediculous concepts such as the multitude of string theories, (Which I consider mathmatical art and not science.) freeing up the time of some amazing minds to find out the true nature of things.

But if you could point me in the right direction I would be most grateful.

[purintjp]

The idea is that if there's enough mass within the universe the gravity between all the masses will become stronger than the original expanding-velocity given to the masses from the big bang.

 

This means that slowly expansion will slow down and everything will come together again.

 

Quite what happens then is more theories. It could all just get a bit mashed up and it'd be a wasted universe... it could form into what was there before the big bang... from then the big bang could occur again and you'd get a cycle of universes.

 

Why does it have to be gravity to cause the contraction ? Since it

expanded due to energy released, could not a reduction in energy begin

to slow and maybe contract spacetime until gravitation masses became

close enough to start to pull everything back together to cause a big

crunch ? I tend to accept this possiblity more than the original big

bang expansion from a singularity. I just don't like the something from

nothing explanations, although a big bang from a big crunch still does not

explain where everything came from.