Is the Expansion of the Universe Leading to Heat Death?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the implications of the universe's expansion and its potential outcomes, specifically heat death and the Big Rip. Participants explore the concept of increasing entropy and whether the universe can be considered a closed system, noting that the observable universe is not entirely closed due to ongoing interactions with regions beyond our horizon. The idea of heat death relates to the second law of thermodynamics, suggesting a gradual increase in entropy, while the Big Rip is contingent on specific properties of dark energy that are not yet confirmed. There is skepticism about the assumption that entropy can increase indefinitely, with some suggesting that the cosmological event horizon may limit entropy within the observable universe. Overall, the fate of the universe remains uncertain, heavily dependent on the nature of dark energy and the cosmological principles governing expansion.
  • #51
Gold Barz said:
What do you guys think of quantum fluctuations/virtual particles being able to inflate as universes during/after heat death?...maybe that is how universes are born? maybe that's how inflation happens...is it a cuckoo theory or a pretty reasonable one?
If that were true, then we could not know how old or how big our present universe is. This would push the cause of the universe so far in the past that we would never be able to discern how the universe came into being to begin with.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #52
Isnt this how inflation theory works though, each "bubble" is a universe in its own right?
 
  • #53
I think not. Inflation is more complicated than that. You must work out the Friedmann models before you can even consider the alternatives. I don't mean to be hard on you, Gold, but I assure you it's complicated. I barely grasp the basics.
 
  • #54
But doesn't the "creator" of the inflation theory suggest that with inflation comes multiple universes? and it makes sense too, if this inflation happened it could have happened more than once and could still be happening. Plus, the wikipedia article seems to suggest that it does come with multiple universes.
 
  • #55
Is the description of Inflation as stated in this link right?

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/universe/howbig.html

It states that our visible universe might just be a fraction of a patch of the entire universe BUT they said inflation could have happened and could still be happening so there might be other universes...wow...is this how inflation really works
 
  • #56
Gold Barz said:
It states that our visible universe might just be a fraction of a patch of the entire universe
True.
BUT they said inflation could have happened and could still be happening so there might be other universes
Show me one.
...wow...is this how inflation really works
I'm afraid so, it depends on a scalar field mediated by the Higgs boson, a fundamental particle predicted by theory yet undiscovered in laboratory physics after 20 years of trying, and leads to speculation of other universes, each one a 'bubble' in an eternally inflating foam, that can never be observed. Neat eh!

Garth
 
  • #57
Garth said:
Gold Barz said:
BUT they said inflation could have happened and could still be happening so there might be other universes
Show me one.
I think he's referring to the idea of "chaotic inflation", which is discussed here:
In October 1981, there was an international meeting in Moscow, where inflation was a major talking point. Stephen Hawking presented a paper claiming that inflation could not be made to work at all, but the Russian cosmologist Andrei Linde presented an improved version, called "new inflation", which got around the difficulties with Guth's model. Ironically, Linde was the official translator for Hawking's talk, and had the embarrassing task of offering the audience the counter-argument to his own work! But after the formal presentations Hawking was persuaded that Linde was right, and inflation might be made to work after all. Within a few months, the new inflationary scenario was also published by Andreas Albrecht and Paul Steinhardt, of the University of Pennsylvania, and by the end of 1982 inflation was well established. Linde has been involved in most of the significant developments with the theory since then. The next step forward came with the realization that there need not be anything special about the Planck- sized region of spacetime that expanded to become our Universe. If that was part of some larger region of spacetime in which all kinds of scalar fields were at work, then only the regions in which those fields produced inflation could lead to the emergence of a large universe like our own. Linde called this "chaotic inflation", because the scalar fields can have any value at different places in the early super-universe; it is the standard version of inflation today, and can be regarded as an example of the kind of reasoning associated with the anthropic principle (but note that this use of the term "chaos" is like the everyday meaning implying a complicated mess, and has nothing to do with the mathematical subject known as "chaos theory").

The idea of chaotic inflation led to what is (so far) the ultimate development of the inflationary scenario. The great unanswered question in standard Big Bang cosmology is what came "before" the singularity. It is often said that the question is meaningless, since time itself began at the singularity. But chaotic inflation suggests that our Universe grew out of a quantum fluctuation in some pre-existing region of spacetime, and that exactly equivalent processes can create regions of inflation within our own Universe. In effect, new universes bud off from our Universe, and our Universe may itself have budded off from another universe, in a process which had no beginning and will have no end. A variation on this theme suggests that the "budding" process takes place through black holes, and that every time a black hole collapses into a singularity it "bounces" out into another set of spacetime dimensions, creating a new inflationary universe -- this is called the baby universe scenario.
 
  • #58
JesseM said:
I think he's referring to the idea of "chaotic inflation", which is discussed here:
Yes, sometimes referred to as 'eternal inflation' Langevin Analysis of Eternal Inflation but my challenge was "Show me one - one of these other universes!"

Garth
 
  • #59
They said quantum fluctuations are the reason for these universes, is it the same type of quantum fluctuations that happen normally in our universe or is it different? do these virtual particles "inflate"? the same virtual particles we see near black holes?
 
  • #60
I read somewhere that the creator of the theory, the brilliant, Dr. Alan Guth says inflation forces the multiple universes scenario on us...

"In fact, Dr. Guth said, "Inflation pretty much forces the idea of multiple universes upon us."

from here - http://courses.washington.edu/phys55x/A%20New%20View%20of%20Our%20Universe%20Only%20One%20of%20Many.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #61
Gold Barz said:
They said quantum fluctuations are the reason for these universes, is it the same type of quantum fluctuations that happen normally in our universe or is it different? do these virtual particles "inflate"? the same virtual particles we see near black holes?
Quantum fluctuations in what?
Some pre-existent quantum foam has to be assumed, can we observe such or unambiguously test for it? I think not.
It is not like the Hawking radiation around a BH because there was no BH, the BH Hawking radiation is based on the spherically symmetric Schwarzschild solution embedded in a flat space-time, but there is no space-time 'outside' any 'yet-to-be-created' universes.

Just a thought.

Garth
 
Last edited:
  • #62
I object to the notion of inflation forcing acceptance of multiverses - albeit less strenuously than say, a week ago. Recent discussions with more qualified experts give me pause to reexamine my position... i.e., I might be wrong. Shocking.
 
  • #63
Gold Barz said:
They said quantum fluctuations are the reason for these universes, is it the same type of quantum fluctuations that happen normally in our universe or is it different? do these virtual particles "inflate"?
As far as I know they are the same, at least in that framework. In my opinion there is, however, an important difference in the theoretical treatment of the subject. When treating quantum fluctuations of any field in any classical background, no backreaction of the fluctuations on the background spacetime is considered. For eternal inflation to work, the backreaction of the fluctuations on the metric has to be considered: some of the fluctuations of the field responsible for inflation can start to inflate space as they have the properties to do so. However, in order to successfully explain the quantum effects of matter on spacetime one should consider the fluctuations of the metric itself (the quantum effects of spacetime). This is not possible without going into wild speculations, as there is no successful quantum gravity yet. The model of eternal inflation (leading to separated universes or bubbles) relies on this heuristic argument which seams not to be completely rigorous. This is just my personal opinion.
 
  • #64
That's a bit wordy for my taste, hellfire, but I like the way you think. My only concern is we might need to relax our parameters when it comes to the fluctuation thing. Your objection on the basis of back-reactions is well founded [there have been numerous papers to that effect]. But I have nagging doubts if it works all the way back to the quantum level. But, hell, I have nagging doubts about everything on that level. So don't let it stop you, just fear what happens in between. I know it scares me.
 
  • #65
Garth said:
Quantum fluctuations in what?
Some pre-existent quantum foam has to be assumed, can we observe such or unambiguously test for it? I think not.

I'm going to agree with Garth on this one. We should try to obtain a more complete understanding of our own universe before indulging in wild speculation about multiverses. If it's possible to test for them, then I'm sure it's many, many years off.
 
  • #66
But the current inflation theory seems to suggest the existence of other "bubbles"...like I said before the creator of the theory said it himself that inflation forces the idea of multiple universes or bubbles on us, but as ST and Garth said there is no way we can test this and we do not even know if it is possible to test for it, and there will be NO communication between bubbles, so when its all said and done it might as well be only one universe, even if there are others.

Also, I have read many times that most scientists do not doubt inflation, is this really true?
 
Last edited:
  • #67
Gold Barz said:
Also, I have read many times that most scientists do not doubt inflation, is this really true?

Eh, it's true that most astronomers/physicists favor inflation over all competing theories, but I wouldn't go as far as to say they don't doubt it. If we detect B-mode polarization of the CMB at the predicted levels, then it may attain the status of "beyond reasonable doubt" in the minds of most scientists, but we still lack direct evidence.
 
  • #68
So in the most current inflationary theory, these pocket universes are suggested right?
 
  • #69
I yield to the graduate student.. but still disagree... much fun!
 
  • #70
Who's the graduate student?, disagree with what point?...I'm lost lol
 
  • #71
Heat death simply means that entropy or total chaos/disorder has reached its ultimate conclusion and every part of the entire Universe/Cosmos has the same temperature as every other part.
Without a difference in temperature, no work can be extracted nor energy generated from any system. Even if every part of the Cosmos = 100C, it would make no difference.
Matter is frozen energy and unless it can be heated or accelerated to a higher state it will remain frozen. This cannot happen once entropy has reached its maximum effect.

www.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/ae181.cfm
 
Back
Top