Sorry…the subject was a ploy.
Wanted to bring a home discussion to you dopers:
What do you think about the thought that this could be the second or third or umpteenth universe that we inhabit today?
When stars collapse, the matter they pull in is so compact, that it would look like the surface of a pinball.
The universe is currently expanding, but that will not always be the case. In a couple of weeks (just kidding) the universe will be shrinking, matter will pull inward on a universal scale, must like the single collapsing star, all matter will be drawn in to a point where matter and energy will become one…and a universe will be born…Like AKIRA…teribble reference I know.
Does anyone think that we’re the first? Does anyone not?
Just a curious question.
While I cannot speak for anyone else, I find your “ploy” extremely annoying and dishonest. If your question cannot stand on its own, without some silly false title, mayhap it doesn’t deserve to. You might want to email one of the forum administrators (David B. and Gaudere) to have your thread title changed.
It seems what you’re describing is an idea called the “Big Crunch.” Although IIRC, there’s some doubt among cosmologists that there’s enough matter in the Universe for it . . .
Hah Hah Hah! That was very clever and wily of you! I looked at the subject and thought it would be concerned with sex but then I came and looked… and it wasn’t! Instead, it is just some lame crap you and your buddy thought up while you were smoking bong s. I will stay here and wait with you while we watch for other dupes to stumble across your wacky ruse.
And then we shall laugh together. The fools. FOOLS! ;)a
Wee bit of advice since you’re new here. At least make sure the title has a little bit relation to the post. Sometimes its stretched pretty thin here, but it is usually at least tied in slightly.
Sex? Universes being born? What, did the Goddess get knocked up?
I always thought she was a bit of a slut.
[sub]Hey, where did that thunderstorm come from?
The latest I heard was that the amount of matter in the universe is just enough that it approaches the point of collapse asymptotically - that is, its rate of expansion approaches zero (and, after that, negative numbers) closer and closer all the time, but never actually gets there.
But I’m only an ignorant linguistician, so what do I know?
[sub](Besides “don’t post with misleading thread titles, it annoys people”, that is…)[/sub]
You do mean linguist don’t you? What is the word for when people add unnecessary morphemes to a word? Specialty vs specialit y or communist vs communistic?p–
If intelligent life is still around when the universe collapses, I would imagine they would do everything in their power to see to it that they survived it. Presumably they would be pretty advanced, what with all those billions of years. So they would probably understand space and time quite well. We haven’t quite got it figured out yet. The important questions we need to answer first are:
Are there other universes/dimensions?
If yes, Is it possible to travel to them?
Is there any way to remain intact when everything crunches?
So maybe they could make it through if they had all the answers. Another possibility is that’s the end. Start fresh, next players. Or it could just be a one time thing. No one is sure yet, but I’m bettin’ we figure it out in the next thousand years, so that should give us plenty of time.
BTW, it is not a foregone conclusion that the universe will cease to expand and begin to contract. It depends greatly on which side of the ‘critical density’ we are on [or perhaps we are exactly at critical density], and that is still very much up for debate. The age of the universe, the rate of expansion, and most importantly the mass of the universe need to be accurately modeled to answer the question.
Ummm… I tend to think of a “linguist” as someone who studies languages, and a “linguistician” as someone who studies linguistics. So, in my mind at least, it’s a minor, but necessary, distinction.
(I did try to hold out for “linguisticist”, but nobody would let me…)
If you are interested, the ancients had a great deal to say about this. The Stoics believed in the principle of ekpyrosis, or the collapse and rebirth of the universe in fire. For more information, check out David E. Hahm’s The Origins of Stoic Cosmology.
According to standard cosmology, there are three possibilities.
The universe is flat. In this case, we’re the first and only.
The universe is open, and we’re again the first and only. I believe the best fits to the data suggest that this is most likely to be the case, but it’s hardly a closed question.
The universe is closed, in which case there will eventually be a Big Crunch. What happens when the universe has collapsed is unknown; it may bounce and give us a new Big Bang, or that might be the end of the game. If there’s a bounce, then we could be the 3 billionth reincarnation of the universe and no one’d be the wiser, otherwise we are yet again the first and only.
So my take on things is that we are most likely the first universe, and probably the only one.
To address dj’s question, there are some models that suggest a whole multitude of universes, all of which are out of causal contact with each other. The only way we could ever travel to them is if, somehow, we were to learn how to exceed the speed of light. Don’t hold your breath waiting.
doggus - As g8rguy said, the topology would either be “closed”, “open”, or “flat”. The current evidence is that the universe is “flat” which means that it will essentially expand forever.
All we can tell is that our universe had a beginning (Big Bang). At least with current technology, there is no way to tell what is “outside” or “before” our universe, so feel free to speculate. Maybe we’re the first and only…or many we are one of an infinite number of universes.
g8rguy - I don’t think the “flat” and “open” models require that this would be the only universe. At least my impression is that it would still be possible to have isolated universes that are still infinite/unbounded within their own spacetime context (some wild mathematics involved here). But maybe this also gets into semantics since we could simply redefine our “universe” to include the spacetimes of these “other universes” as well.
I think the common way to use the word universe is as follows:
universe (Not capitalized)- Our universe (which appears to have started from the Big Bang) ia an example. There may or may not be multiple universes.
Universe - Once you add the capital U, it refers to everything that exists everywhere. Which may include billions of universes
At least that’s how I’ve seen it used. The word nazis around here may tell you something different, but I find this makes it easier to discuss metaphysical issues.
If there are/were/will be other universes, since they are completely independent of ours, the question of which was first may be a red herring, as time is an aspect internal to this universe, there might be a whole stack of them anyway.
Ah, I see our disconnect. Allow me to rephrase. In a flat or open spacetime, the size of space monotonically increases. Thus, there could be no Big Crunch, followed by a new Big Bang (and hence a new universe). In our own spacetime context, if the universe is not closed, there is no cycle of bang/crunch/bang/crunch, and hence we are after the first and only bang in our spacetime. I hope that adequately gets at what I was saying. (Trying to avoid the possibility of multiple sets of spacetimes was why I tossed in the “according to standard cosmology” bit.)
I don’t have a cite, but I could swear within the last year it was determined that Hubbles constant was greater than one. Meaning, the universe would continue to expand. So my guess is that this one will not repeat. However, that doesn’t preclude the possibility of other universes. My understanding were that until recently it was believed that the constant was 1, meaning that the universe would eventually reach settle and stop expanding, but would not contract. A value less than one, would mean that at some point it would stop expanding and then contract right back to the big bang.