Will the universe end in a Big Crunch or a Big Rip?

  • Thread starter Thread starter whiteholes
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Big rip Rip
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the potential endings of the universe, specifically the Big Crunch versus the Big Rip. One argument for the Big Crunch is based on the finite amount of hydrogen in stars, which will eventually be converted into heavier elements, leading to a lack of nuclear fusion. This process suggests that the universe has a finite age and may undergo cycles of expansion and contraction. However, observations of supernovae indicate that the universe's expansion is currently accelerating, supporting theories of dark energy. The debate highlights the complexities of cosmic evolution and the uncertainties surrounding the universe's ultimate fate.
whiteholes
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
How do you think our universe will end like? I think it would be the Big crunch! One evidence is that the amount of mass in stars divided by the total amount of mass in the universe is nonzero. After some length of time, any given star will convert too much hydrogen into helium (or heavier elements) to continue nuclear fusion. From this we conclude that in unit time, the amount of hydrogen converted into helium by a given star divided by the star's mass is nonzero. Combining this with the earlier statement, we conclude that the amount of hydrogen converted into helium by stars as a whole divided by the mass of the universe is nonzero. There is no known process that can return heavier elements to hydrogen in the necessary quantities, and any would probably violate the second law of thermodynamics. Therefore, the amount of time needed for stars to convert all of the hydrogen in the universe into helium is finite, and it will never change back. After this, only heavier-element-burning stars will exist (and these will die when they hit iron, an event known as the heat death of the universe). This hasn't happened yet, so either the universe is of finite age, it has undergone major changes in its history, or there exists some highly exotic process (for which no direct evidence exists) that produces hydrogen to keep it going.


So it is possible it will end in a Big Crunch! The time graph of our universe would be something like a bell shape that repeats itself. Getting larger after every Big bang.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
white holes said:
One evidence is that the amount of mass in stars divided by the total amount of mass in the universe is nonzero. After some length of time, any given star will convert too much hydrogen into helium (or heavier elements) to continue nuclear fusion. From this we conclude that in unit time, the amount of hydrogen converted into helium by a given star divided by the star's mass is nonzero. Combining this with the earlier statement, we conclude that the amount of hydrogen converted into helium by stars as a whole divided by the mass of the universe is nonzero.
Why is this evidence? You're just saying 'Stars make up a certain percentage of the universe's mass' and 'Hydrogen makes up a certain percentage of the stars, and this percentage is shrinking'.
white holes said:
This hasn't happened yet, so either the universe is of finite age
The entire 'big bang theory' revolves around the universe being of finite age (about 13~14 billion years).

There is evidence from supernova observations in other galaxies that the universe's expansion is accelerating. This is part of the reason for the 'dark energy' theories which have appeared in recent years.
 
Publication: Redox-driven mineral and organic associations in Jezero Crater, Mars Article: NASA Says Mars Rover Discovered Potential Biosignature Last Year Press conference The ~100 authors don't find a good way this could have formed without life, but also can't rule it out. Now that they have shared their findings with the larger community someone else might find an explanation - or maybe it was actually made by life.
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
Back
Top