Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
sean6

Universe may not have an end, but it definite

7 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

In the beginning was the Bang? Universe may not have an end, but it definitely had a beginning, claim physicists

The Big Bang theory was coined in the 40s - but physicists still puzzle over whether it even happened.

Frederick Hoyle, the astronomer and physicist who coined the term, 'Big Bang,' much preferred the idea that the universe might have existed forever.

Now two mathematicians claim to have 'proved' that it didn't - it might not have an end, but the universe definitely had a beginning.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2135025/In-beginning-Bang-Universe-end-definitely-beginning-claim-physicists.html

so what came first, space or time ? you would need space for matter to go into, and time for space and matter.? and if the universe has no end how can this story be true ? just what i think .

Edited by sean6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets just wait for the aliens to land and tell us all about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so what came first, space or time ? you would need space for matter to go into, and time for space and matter.? and if the universe has no end how can this story be true ? just what i think .

maybe time does not exist in space .it is made up .. for our convienences. i wonder where would we be without time. yeah just like the cavemen . hunt. making kids. sleeping .

yeah your right wait for aliens to show up ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Big Bangs are happening all the time, have always been happening and will always be happening all around our universe. BB's create space, time, matter, the fundamental forces and the particular laws that govern these all at one go.

What happens after that depends on the strengths of the various fundamental forces. I think it's a good idea not to have an end of our particular universe, even though in its final eternity there will be nothing left. The universe as we know it today will have an end, but that will take a very long time to happen, so we won't be around to witness it. Another good idea. Entropy will eventually take over, resulting in an evenly distributed temperature difference everywhere, so nothing will be happening.

This last state of affairs will then last forever. It's kind of a sad ending without a real end to it. It makes one wonder why a BB in the first place, if it's all going to peter out to nothing. I guess we should enjoy our universe while it's all stuck together like it is now.

This is my take on the subject, anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the beginning was the Bang? Universe may not have an end, but it definitely had a beginning, claim physicists

The Big Bang theory was coined in the 40s - but physicists still puzzle over whether it even happened.

Frederick Hoyle, the astronomer and physicist who coined the term, 'Big Bang,' much preferred the idea that the universe might have existed forever.

Now two mathematicians claim to have 'proved' that it didn't - it might not have an end, but the universe definitely had a beginning.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2135025/In-beginning-Bang-Universe-end-definitely-beginning-claim-physicists.html

so what came first, space or time ? you would need space for matter to go into, and time for space and matter.? and if the universe has no end how can this story be true ? just what i think .

Maybe black holes (which are really just dense stars) have an upper limit to which they can grow before they go out in one colossal explosion.

I propose the universe didnt start with the big bang and the big bang was infact what I am going to designate a Type 3 supernova. That neatly accounts for why there is a lack of anti-matter too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm.. If the universe reaches 0 entrophy (a uniform temperature) it would most likely be only a fraction of a degree above absolute 0 (or am I wrong?)... Would it be too cold for electrons to move?... A 0 electric current so to speak... In that case, if matter/energy is completely static, would time exist?

I'm not up to speed on a lot of this type theory, so if anyone out there has thoughts on the matter I would really like to read it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmmm.. If the universe reaches 0 entrophy (a uniform temperature) it would most likely be only a fraction of a degree above absolute 0 (or am I wrong?)... Would it be too cold for electrons to move?... A 0 electric current so to speak... In that case, if matter/energy is completely static, would time exist?

I'm not expert on the subject, either. If the universe reaches a uniform temperature everywhere, that would mean maximum entropy, not 0 entropy.

If protons eventually decay, or the increasing expansion of space due to dark energy pulls even atoms apart, atoms would not exist in this far future universe, and it would seem to me electrons would be separated from each other as well, thus no electric current so to speak, as you have said.

I think, if we understand time and space as the space-time continuum, time would still exist even though nothing would be happening.

These are just my thoughts based on my own limited knowledge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.