Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Heat death

  1. Aug 10, 2003 #1

    wolram

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    i have been thinking how our universe could continue if it suffers
    heat death, i can think of one possibility , that is that a
    bose einstein condensate could form, is that a possibility?
    if it is then interactions between BECs could rekindle our universe
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 10, 2003 #2

    Chi Meson

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Sorry.

    Heat is, specifically, the flow of thermal energy. Heat death does not mean that there is no more "temperature." It simply means that there is no more transfer of energy between objects.

    A transfer of energy is required to cause any sort of change in a system; therefore, if no energy can be transfered, then no work can be done. THis includes breathing.

    Unfortunately again, the actual temperature of most of the universe will be about 4 degrees above absolute zero (or was that 0.4?), still too warm for the BEC.

    ANd yet again unfortunately, the only interaction that might occur (up to the minute theoreticians out there: please correct me if I am wrong) is that some matter will "fall" into other matter. Not much of an interaction to do much work and no where near the "rekindleing of Universe" magnitude. I picture this analogy: all the mountains of the earth have crumbled into sand and the earth is now an ultra smooth ball. NOthing can fall anymore because nothing is higher than anything else (This is "heat death"). All of a sudden, the Pauli Exclusion Principle is recinded for, say 50% of the matter of the earth; the earth collapses into a smaller sphere.

    Whoop-de-do. Now its even harder for anything else to be done.
     
  4. Aug 10, 2003 #3

    marcus

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2015 Award
    Dearly Missed

    Do you suppose that the universe might be closed
    Ω0 > 1, spatially nearly flat but finite?
    And yet because of positive cosmological constant, slated to
    expand endlessly barring unforeseen events?

    Ned Wright has been considering this model recently---fitting it to the supernova data. It is not totally out of the question.

    In that case all a highly-evolved species would need to do is manipulate Λ (!) and they might reverse expansion and bring about a big crunch. I am not saying that OUR species would ever do such an outrageous thing to nature, but I suppose that some species might----one that didnt like the increasingly cold lonely enfeebled prospect of endless expansion.
     
  5. Aug 11, 2003 #4

    Eh

    User Avatar

    How would it be possible for a species to change the negative pressure of the cosmological constant? There appears to be the idea (from supergravity and quintessence) that the force driving the acceleration could become positive and thus cause a contraction, but it doesn't seem to be something anything intelligent could cause.

    In the event of a big crunch, all life is screwed at any rate. Heat death would just be a more appealing fate for those who are claustrophobic.
     
  6. Aug 11, 2003 #5

    marcus

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2015 Award
    Dearly Missed

    but if the crunch was followed by another expansion stage---a kind of replay---life might re-evolve and have a second chance

    anyway it is all too speculative to be much good for discussion
    and we have no indication (as far as I know) that there is any life except on earth

    Eh, have you read ned wright's "News of the Universe" for August?

    I would like to know what you think about his fitting supernova data to a "closed", or spatially finite, case.
    There is a graph there that looks interesting.
    Do you know what I am talking about? Try this link

    http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/sne_cosmology.html
     
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2003
  7. Aug 11, 2003 #6

    Eh

    User Avatar

    I took a look, but the graph seemed to indicate omega is actually hovering between being open and closed. In other words, it's a close call. But given that no one can find out where this missing mass is, I think cosmologists tend to lean towards a value of 1.

    Still, assuming a big crunch is going to happen, there would seem to be a few problems. I will assume that some quantum theory of gravity is valid and that a bounce could happen.(both string theory and LQG seem to allow it) The question of entropy comes up, with the universe containing less and less useful energy with each cycle. So given a long past of contractions/expansions, the universe should be quite disordered and not suited for life. But I'm not sure about the details of this, or if SST or LQG could offer a solution for that.
     
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2003
  8. Aug 11, 2003 #7

    Chi Meson

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Marcus said:
    "In that case all a highly-evolved species would need to do is manipulate Ë (!) and they might reverse expansion and bring about a big crunch. "

    I suppose we should practice by manipulating pi?

    Heh heh. THat's a joke.
     
  9. Aug 11, 2003 #8

    marcus

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2015 Award
    Dearly Missed

    I would not want MY species to be involved in anything as
    underhanded as manipulating pi.

    Species who manipulate pi---the curvature of space---are very likely to end up creating a supermassive black hole at the center of their galaxy and disappearing down it.

    Heh heh
     
  10. Aug 12, 2003 #9
    Manipulate pi? Hell, it's trancendental anyway.

    How can one fiddle
    With a transcendental?

    Impiety, if not downright Blasphemy. Euclid might curse you from his grave, not to mention several Egyptians.

    Planck's quantum may just come to our rescue. Possibly, it provides just enough uncertainty to balance us onto a flat universe.

    But alter a quantum to provide "steady state?" I think that's "more or less" up to Fate (one of the many facets of God).

    Me, you ask? I'm still fiddling around with micro-cosmic stuff: Why an individual isotopic atom is provoked to decay. Pithy stuff.

    Oh, you didn't ask? Beg Pardon.

    Thanks, Rudy

    PS: I think Marcus' view is near-brilliant or at the least, very bright; and I think Ned Wright may be on a very productive track.

    And... heh heh, heh.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 12, 2003
  11. Aug 12, 2003 #10

    LURCH

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor


    I have heard of the problem of entropy in oscilating-universe cosmology, but I don't think it applies. Entropy is the distribution of energy throughout the universe, and doesn't apply to loss of energy from the universe as a whole. Indeed, if energy were to leave the universe, it would be a violation of the principle of conservation. Experimental evidence supports this principle very well, showing that energy can't just cease to exist (which is what would be happening if it somehow left the cosmos).
     
  12. Aug 16, 2003 #11
    Given the universe grows with the sophistication of our instruments for observing it, it's unlikely this is the only one big bang universe to ever occured or in existence.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Heat death
  1. Heat Death, eh? (Replies: 6)

  2. Heat Death (Replies: 7)

Loading...