Notices
Results 1 to 78 of 78

Thread: End of the universe

  1. #1 End of the universe 
    Forum Freshman Carbon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    79
    Do you think that the universe has an end?
    Maybe it hasn't..
    Maybe it has.. but how would an end look? not like a wall, huh?
    Please tell me your theorys


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    None. Maddeningly simple, huh?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250
    G'day from the land of ozzzzzzz


    No end
    No start
    Smile and live another day
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Freshman Carbon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    79
    ye, simple.. or..?
    how is it possible? ;S feels so weird the humas, when they are thinking about this 'non-end' universe..
    why do you think that there isn't an end?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250
    G'day Carbon


    Because matter cannot be created and than turned into nothing.
    Smile and live another day
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    Looks perfectly natural to me:



    Expect to see "GAME OVER" suddenly fill the screen? That would be weird.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250
    G'day from the land of ozzzzzzzzz


    When does it end?
    Smile and live another day
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8 End of Universe 
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    West Sussex
    Posts
    3
    Here is a thought:We have ahead of us an infinite period of time,but hey wait a minute we also have an infinite amount of time that stretches into the past,this is incomprehensible to the human mind,however it seems logical to me that we could not arrive at this point in time unless we have always existed not always in this form of course or necessarily as conscious entities.And this applies ofcourse to evrything in the universe,nothing can be created or destroyed only transformed.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250
    G'day Valtom

    Thats Ok,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,now come back to earth. Explain it close to reality.
    Smile and live another day
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    10
    I don't think soooooooooooooooo.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Junior SolomonGrundy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    232
    The universe has ended and begin for manny times ... yes it will end again and it will start , that is his nature.When the universe will end it will be as one big core of same energy.
    Solomon Grundy
    In 1944, this creature rose from the swamp, with tremendous strength and some dormant memories that for example allowed him to speak English, but not knowing what he was, and not remembering Cyrus Gold or his fate. Wandering throughout the swamp, he encountered two escaped criminals, killed them, and took their clothes. When they asked him his name, he simply muttered that he had been born on Monday. Reminded of an old nursery rhyme about a man born on Monday, the thugs named the creature "Solomon Grundy".
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    14
    The theory I've heard is that either the universe will collapse on itself creating cataclysmic energy. Or the universe will expand until everything becomes cold and lonely.

    If I have to guess, I would say that the universe will end the next time someone replies to this post!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    I think the universe, as everything else, has an end that I think will rather be a transition to an other unknown region the universe
    was surrounded by. I can not think of such an 'end' any different. All the mass contained in the known and even unknown universe
    must have its origin somewhere before the universe, so to say.

    I can't think of BB as the very origin of everything conceivable.

    Steve
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Freshman Fozzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Somerset, England
    Posts
    15
    You ask "Do you think that the universe has an end?"

    Do you mean an end such as a wall, or an end in time?

    It can't end in a wall because the question will always be "what's on the other side of the wall?"
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three rights make a left.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    414
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Costas
    G'day Carbon


    Because matter cannot be created and than turned into nothing.
    Except in the world of quantum physics...
    "The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt" - Bertrand Russell
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250
    G'day from the land of ozzzzzzz

    Here in the land of ozzzzzzzzz down under anything is possble. We have Santa and the Easter bunny and the Wild Tasmanian tiger.


    We all have opinions and some will be quite extra ordinary. Thats ok

    If we can support it by science than we start to build a model on good foundations. But! if we use ad hoc ideas and theories to make up the foundations we create a model that is quite strong in logic and become a standard until one day or decades after a PROOF is given that makes it all fall down.

    The universe is a total of all. This been total cannot be expanded or contracted.

    So we look at the parts that make up the universe. We study their behaviour and we observe that individual parts expand and contract in an endless events of recycling.


    Such as quarsars and jets

    The brightest quasar: 3C 273 and its jet
    http://www.astr.ua.edu/keel/agn/3c273.html

    The blowtorch jet in the radio galaxy NGC 6251
    http://www.astr.ua.edu/keel/agn/ngc6251.html



    One important lesson from radio galaxies is that the central engine continues to eject material in nearly the same direction for at least several million years, based on the fact that the tiny parsec-scale jets in the core regions point in the same direction as the very extended radio structure which may stretch several million light-years (and thus took at least that many years to form).

    People sometimes talk of quarsars being the end, death stage. Think again of birth stage.



    Finally, the innermost core is shown in a VLBI map with a resolution of only 3 milliarcseconds (0.003 arcsecond), showing that knots are still moving outward from the nucleus in nearly the same direction. The VLA and VLBI maps have been rotated to make the jet horizontal for convenience. The WSRT map shows the faint counterjet opposite the bright jet; its weakness may indicate that the jet is in relativistic motion more or less toward us, so that Doppler boosting makes it appear dramatically brighter than its counterpart.

    These knots give birth to stars, not just single stars but cluster of stars. Imagine the effect on the form and evolution of the galaxy.

    This activity is directly related to the type and form of the galaxy.

    M87's Energetic Jet
    http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap011101.html


    Cosmic Tornado HH49/50


    Though such energetic outflows are well known to be associated with the formation of young stars, the exact cause of the spiraling structures apparent in this case is still mysterious. The embryonic star responsible for the 100-kilometer per second jet is located just off the top of the picture, while the bright star seen near the tip of the jet may just by chance lie along the line of sight


    Relativistic jets and beams in radio galaxies
    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal.../275516a0.html



    RADIO-ASTRONOMICAL observations have recently clarified the link between the components of extended double sources and the primary power supply in the central galactic nucleus. The new data vindicate the general idea1−4 that power is continuously supplied by beams; it seems, furthermore, that the beams are collimated in a scale little larger than the central power supply ( 1 pc), and that the orientation remains fairly steady over the whole lifetime. The giant double source 3C236, 2 107 light yr in total extent5,6, has a compact central component aligned with the overall axis7; a similar phenomenon is observed in Cygnus A (ref. 8). In NGC6251, a straight jet 200 kpc long9 emanates from a 'blowtorch' 0.1 pc wide in the galactic nucleus10. There is a radio jet11 in 3C147 reminiscent of the well-known features in M87 and 3C273; and very long baseline interferometry (VLBI) reveals linear structure in several compact extragalactic sources12. It is argued here that collimation occurs close to a central collapsed object, and that the beams are orientated along its spin axis. Strong-field gravitational effects then stabilise the beams against jitter even if the gas fuelling the source has an inconstant flow pattern. Radio galaxies where the beam axis seems to have gradually drifted or swung, rather than pointing in a constant direction, may belong to a special class that have experienced collisions and recurrent nuclear activity.

    After observing hundreds of images of jets and how they form, its seems they may go in a straight line for millions of years, this means the engine that drives such a force and create the electromagnetic field to keep it stable must be created close to the Nuceleon that we call a black hole or with the Black hole. If its within the black hole, we are looking at the behaviour of subatomic particles such as quarks creating such jets possibly via some form of Z-pinch that is realted to the double layer property of plasma. Its just an opinion.
    Smile and live another day
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Costas
    The universe is a total of all.
    Hello Harry Costas, --->

    Saying this don't you ask yourself where it began or when, or how to get to its boundaries or there like?

    Steve
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250
    G'day Steve

    You said

    Saying this don't you ask yourself where it began or when, or how to get to its boundaries or there like?
    What Began?
    What part?
    What boundry?

    No start no end.
    Smile and live another day
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Yo.

    The universes. Was it all same really? No more black or white the least? Only black, or white at will, depending on your mood? Just tell me I will be prepared.

    Steve
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2
    Seems to me there are a couple of possibilities:

    1 - the end of the universe is well-described by extrapolating our current theories
    2 - at some point between now and then, our theories break down (or at least need revising!)

    In case 1, we're broadly looking at one of the following:
    - universe expands for ever (heat death)
    - universe expands, just reaching infinity (critical case; heat death)
    - universe stops expanding and contracts (Big Crunch)
    - universe turns out to by cyclic (eg. ekpyrotic ,sp?, models)

    In case 2, who know!

    My money is on case 2. I'd be pretty surprised (but impressed!) if we'd nailed cosmology already to that extent.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250
    G'day all

    The expansion of the universe is space/time and not actual distance.

    It does not apply to the galaxies .

    If it did we would not be observing galaxy collisions on a regular basis.
    Smile and live another day
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Costas
    G'day all

    The expansion of the universe is space/time and not actual distance.

    It does not apply to the galaxies .

    If it did we would not be observing galaxy collisions on a regular basis.
    Why not? Was it starting to expand from one common point which would mean there was a begin to it (to the universe )? And, what about the cosmological constant therefore?

    Steve
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250
    G'day steve

    If you want to think along the lines of the big bang,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,thats ok

    A better way to think is to try to understand the workings of stars and galaxy evolution. If you get the chance to research the cyclic process you will begin to understand that Santa is like the Big Bang Theory, one day you will find that Santa does not come at Xmas.
    Smile and live another day
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    I have no idea now what your point is, which was my fault maybe.

    Steve
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25 Re: End of the universe 
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Carbon
    Do you think that the universe has an end?
    Maybe it hasn't..
    Maybe it has.. but how would an end look? not like a wall, huh?
    Please tell me your theorys
    As I have answered on many ocasions, NO.

    Believe in the many Laws of Physics, Experiment and the Observations to base you opinions on.

    To begin with?
    What is the universe?
    The universe is just two small particles known as the proton and the electron.
    The Laws of Physics have married them (forces) into the hydrogen atoms.
    If it wasn't for this, they would be separated and in this manner, they would repel each other (like charges repel each other) to create a non-sensical BBT.

    So, in a gaseous state, they do repel each other also, BUT when these gasses are concentrated enough, they compress to form stars (liquid state as plasmas).
    Then in this state, they 'fuse' into heavier matter to become solids in old age like the 'neutron' stars.

    But the important thing to remember here is that the HA's did not increase in numbers or decrease in numbers through these phase transitions.

    They do not reproducie like the plants do.

    So these tiny HA's always existed. Believe in the Conservation Laws.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250
    G'day from the land of ozzzzz

    The make up of all particles can go back to Neutrons and Protons.

    Proton + Eletron = Neutron.

    Few thousand electrons = Proton + Electron = Neutron.

    What makes up Protons and Neutrons.

    Quark particles make up Protons and Neutrons.

    Where do we stop in finding the basic particle?

    We can study Neutron stars that have a Neutron matrix.

    We can study the so called theoretical stars such as Quark and preon stars.

    There is alot of papers written on all of them including composites.


    =====================================

    Hello Steve Miller

    No fault to anybody mate.

    This is just an open discussion. You can be right and I can be wrong.

    Its just that, to me the Big Bang theory has entrapped many people into thinking along main stream that people neglect to try to swim upstream in fear of being wrong. Through History this type of thinking has repeated itself time and time again.

    With the mountain of information against the BBT and new observations that do not agree with the BBT. Its time to question and investicate via science means and not via a chinese whisper and emotions.
    Smile and live another day
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Right..., one question left. Santa was late this year?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250
    G'day Steve

    Mate, down under Santa is never late. Maybe he comes down here first.

    My Kids love Santa.

    As they grow up one by one, they begin to understand and continue the same with their kids.
    Smile and live another day
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    cnn.com ?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Costas
    G'day from the land of ozzzzz

    The make up of all particles can go back to Neutrons and Protons.

    Proton + Eletron = Neutron.

    Few thousand electrons = Proton + Electron = Neutron.

    What makes up Protons and Neutrons.

    Quark particles make up Protons and Neutrons.

    Where do we stop in finding the basic particle?

    We can study Neutron stars that have a Neutron matrix.

    We can study the so called theoretical stars such as Quark and preon stars.

    There is alot of papers written on all of them including composites.

    whisper and emotions.[/quote]

    Neutrons do not exist in an isolated state. My opinion is that neutron stars have scattered protons within.
    They are create4d in the stars because they need a proton to exist.

    So, as I have said, the only basic particles are the protons and the electrons.

    Quarks are a product of nuclear bombardments and do NOT exist as free particles.

    Cosmo..
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250
    G'day Cosmo

    Mate do a bit of research.


    http://arxiv.org/find/all/1/all:+AND.../0/1/0/all/0/1

    http://arxiv.org/find/all/1/all:+AND.../0/1/0/all/0/1

    Sometime what we think is not what matters.
    Smile and live another day
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Costas
    G'day Cosmo

    Mate do a bit of research.


    http://arxiv.org/find/all/1/all:+AND.../0/1/0/all/0/1

    http://arxiv.org/find/all/1/all:+AND.../0/1/0/all/0/1

    Sometime what we think is not what matters.
    They do NOT exist in a free state.

    The current theory HIDES them in the protons and the neutrons.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250
    G'day from the land of ozzzzz


    Cosmo said


    They do NOT exist in a free state.

    The current theory HIDES them in the protons and the neutrons.
    Define free space.

    Ok under what state and conditions would you find Neutron or quark matter?

    How do you expalin the foramtion of compact matter and the transition to Black holes( not that I agree with main stream as to the definition and make up of black holes)?

    How do you explain Neutron Star?
    Smile and live another day
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Quote Originally Posted by An author :) on Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    In classical physics, free space is a concept of electromagnetic theory, corresponding to a theoretically "perfect" vacuum, and sometimes referred to as the vacuum of free space. The definitions of the ampere and meter SI units are based upon measurements corrected to refer to free space.
    It's amazing, lot's of work (and mistakes ) have been being done, yet.

    Steve
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250
    G'day Steve

    Yes I know what is free space.

    Now under what conditions or state can Neutron or quark matter exist?
    Smile and live another day
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1
    universe is an ocean of galaxies and
    its end is beyond human imagination.

    i beleive that universe will end someday... since it somehow came in to existance a very long time back

    where humans will be at the end of the universe, tats an interesting topic than the end of the universe


    ----------------------------

    kalpanag

    wide circles
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Costas
    G'day Steve

    Yes I know what is free space.

    Now under what conditions or state can Neutron or quark matter exist?
    Sorry, you asked to defining free space. Under which conditions? Conditions to originate and conditions to be existent, I would say. But, does your question coincide with 'no start no end'.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Costas
    G'day Steve

    You said

    Saying this don't you ask yourself where it began or when, or how to get to its boundaries or there like?
    What Began?
    What part?
    What boundry?

    No start no end.
    I'm baffled.

    Steve
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250
    G'day from the land of ozzzzzzzzz

    Free space was in reference to Neutron and quark compact matter related to stars.

    The question was

    Can Neutrons form an ultra dense plasma matter compacted to densities greater than the centre of an atom?
    ====================================

    Baffle??????
    about what?

    ====================================

    In reference to the universe:

    Did it have an origin? NO

    Where did the matter come from? Always here in one phase of matter or another.
    Smile and live another day
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Your saying was different than everything I can think on. I would understood the universe as not to be existent in
    case it had no origin. Thus it couldn't 'contain' anything. No mass, no matter, no energy.

    Do you think matter can change it's state to turn energy, or energy changing to be matter? Or matter changing
    it's state only to be another sort of matter? And, if yes, how does energy fit in? Was 'your matter' meaning energy
    as well. I hope you don't get my posting as to be too offhand. It's not meant that way.

    I just don't wanna start over on the time zones again and again. It's 14.03 over here now. Same day.

    Steve
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Costas
    G'day from the land of ozzzzz


    Cosmo said


    They do NOT exist in a free state.

    The current theory HIDES them in the protons and the neutrons.
    Define free space.

    Ok under what state and conditions would you find Neutron or quark matter?

    How do you expalin the foramtion of compact matter and the transition to Black holes( not that I agree with main stream as to the definition and make up of black holes)?

    How do you explain Neutron Star?
    Free space (did you mean 'state?) is an empty space (void) with no matter. There may be many such voids in the universe. The average density of the universe is one HA per cubic meter.
    When you consider that practically all the matter is condensed into structures, then there much be many empty bubbles(?) in space.
    If you meant 'free state', that mean 'in isolation'.

    As I said above, Neutrons do not exist in a free state (in isolation) except for about 10-15 minutes.

    Neutreon stars, IMO, eventually decay back into protons and electrons as the neutrons do when in isolation.
    The heavy elements decay when the ratio of neutrons to protons exceeds a 3/2 ratio.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250
    G'day from the land of ozzzzzzzzz


    Cosmo said

    As I said above, Neutrons do not exist in a free state (in isolation) except for about 10-15 minutes.

    Neutreon stars, IMO, eventually decay back into protons and electrons as the neutrons do when in isolation.
    The heavy elements decay when the ratio of neutrons to protons exceeds a 3/2 ratio.
    Ok, explain the transition to a black hole?

    and

    Research Neutron stars and compacted degenerate matter.

    http://arxiv.org/find/all/1/all:+AND.../0/1/0/all/0/1
    http://arxiv.org/find/all/1/all:+AND.../0/1/0/all/0/1
    http://arxiv.org/find/all/1/all:+AND.../0/1/0/all/0/1
    Smile and live another day
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Costas
    G'day from the land of ozzzzzzzzz


    Cosmo said

    As I said above, Neutrons do not exist in a free state (in isolation) except for about 10-15 minutes.

    Neutreon stars, IMO, eventually decay back into protons and electrons as the neutrons do when in isolation.
    The heavy elements decay when the ratio of neutrons to protons exceeds a 3/2 ratio.
    Ok, explain the transition to a black hole?

    and

    Research Neutron stars and compacted degenerate matter.

    http://arxiv.org/find/all/1/all:+AND.../0/1/0/all/0/1
    http://arxiv.org/find/all/1/all:+AND.../0/1/0/all/0/1
    http://arxiv.org/find/all/1/all:+AND.../0/1/0/all/0/1
    Harry

    I am a 'free thinker'.
    So you cannot always depend on the educated experts.

    These people are promoting the BBT. That is enough for me to think for myself.

    As a FT, I am not 'regimented into an 'educational straight jacket'.

    I do study the books and periodicals to get informed about all the research and observations done.

    But when I see solutions or interpretations done of some evidence that I disagree with, than I seek my own solutions.

    Don't get me wrong. I do respect some experts like Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, Newton, Planck, Bohr, and Arp.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250
    G'day cosmo

    A free thinker is ok.

    A closed mind is different.

    Sometimes "knowing" is a trap in itself.
    Smile and live another day
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    (Q)
    (Q) is offline
    Forum Isotope (Q)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,650
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmo

    I am a 'free thinker'.

    I am not 'regimented into an 'educational straight jacket'.

    I seek my own solutions.

    I do respect some experts like ... Arp.
    The qualifiers of your post are self-evident.
    Religious Fundamentalist Club - Member #1.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #45  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Even BBT supporters don't have reason to believe the universe will end. They're just mis-defining the term "universe". It's supposed to include everything, and they're trying to make it a part of something bigger. They might call it a "multiverse", I guess, but if we allow such re-definitions, we'll never have a word that means what "universe" was first meant to mean.

    For some reason the human mind can only approach objects of finite size, so even if we argue that space has a finite distance, and time, but then suggest there are infinity dimensions....... someone will try and determine when the first dimension began, or put an absolute limit on how many there are.



    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Costas
    G'day from the land of ozzzzzzz

    Here in the land of ozzzzzzzzz down under anything is possble. We have Santa and the Easter bunny and the Wild Tasmanian tiger.


    We all have opinions and some will be quite extra ordinary. Thats ok

    If we can support it by science than we start to build a model on good foundations. But! if we use ad hoc ideas and theories to make up the foundations we create a model that is quite strong in logic and become a standard until one day or decades after a PROOF is given that makes it all fall down.

    The universe is a total of all. This been total cannot be expanded or contracted.

    So we look at the parts that make up the universe. We study their behaviour and we observe that individual parts expand and contract in an endless events of recycling.


    Such as quarsars and jets

    The brightest quasar: 3C 273 and its jet
    http://www.astr.ua.edu/keel/agn/3c273.html

    The blowtorch jet in the radio galaxy NGC 6251
    http://www.astr.ua.edu/keel/agn/ngc6251.html



    One important lesson from radio galaxies is that the central engine continues to eject material in nearly the same direction for at least several million years, based on the fact that the tiny parsec-scale jets in the core regions point in the same direction as the very extended radio structure which may stretch several million light-years (and thus took at least that many years to form).

    People sometimes talk of quarsars being the end, death stage. Think again of birth stage.



    Finally, the innermost core is shown in a VLBI map with a resolution of only 3 milliarcseconds (0.003 arcsecond), showing that knots are still moving outward from the nucleus in nearly the same direction. The VLA and VLBI maps have been rotated to make the jet horizontal for convenience. The WSRT map shows the faint counterjet opposite the bright jet; its weakness may indicate that the jet is in relativistic motion more or less toward us, so that Doppler boosting makes it appear dramatically brighter than its counterpart.

    These knots give birth to stars, not just single stars but cluster of stars. Imagine the effect on the form and evolution of the galaxy.

    This activity is directly related to the type and form of the galaxy.

    M87's Energetic Jet
    http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap011101.html


    Cosmic Tornado HH49/50


    Though such energetic outflows are well known to be associated with the formation of young stars, the exact cause of the spiraling structures apparent in this case is still mysterious. The embryonic star responsible for the 100-kilometer per second jet is located just off the top of the picture, while the bright star seen near the tip of the jet may just by chance lie along the line of sight


    Relativistic jets and beams in radio galaxies
    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal.../275516a0.html



    RADIO-ASTRONOMICAL observations have recently clarified the link between the components of extended double sources and the primary power supply in the central galactic nucleus. The new data vindicate the general idea1−4 that power is continuously supplied by beams; it seems, furthermore, that the beams are collimated in a scale little larger than the central power supply ( 1 pc), and that the orientation remains fairly steady over the whole lifetime. The giant double source 3C236, 2 107 light yr in total extent5,6, has a compact central component aligned with the overall axis7; a similar phenomenon is observed in Cygnus A (ref. 8). In NGC6251, a straight jet 200 kpc long9 emanates from a 'blowtorch' 0.1 pc wide in the galactic nucleus10. There is a radio jet11 in 3C147 reminiscent of the well-known features in M87 and 3C273; and very long baseline interferometry (VLBI) reveals linear structure in several compact extragalactic sources12. It is argued here that collimation occurs close to a central collapsed object, and that the beams are orientated along its spin axis. Strong-field gravitational effects then stabilise the beams against jitter even if the gas fuelling the source has an inconstant flow pattern. Radio galaxies where the beam axis seems to have gradually drifted or swung, rather than pointing in a constant direction, may belong to a special class that have experienced collisions and recurrent nuclear activity.

    After observing hundreds of images of jets and how they form, its seems they may go in a straight line for millions of years, this means the engine that drives such a force and create the electromagnetic field to keep it stable must be created close to the Nuceleon that we call a black hole or with the Black hole. If its within the black hole, we are looking at the behaviour of subatomic particles such as quarks creating such jets possibly via some form of Z-pinch that is realted to the double layer property of plasma. Its just an opinion.
    I wonder if the process of the bh driving the jet, causes the bh to lose any energy in total. (Which would be interesting to discuss in the other topic I started on the question of whether a bh can lose energy via its gravity from objects passing it in the right way [outside the event horizon, I mean])
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #46  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250
    G'day from the land of ozzzzzz

    Look I have to make it quite clear, I'm not that smart and I'm still learning. I read alot of papers, but that only makes me awear that I know very little.

    Steve Miller said

    Do you think matter can change it's state to turn energy, or energy changing to be matter? Or matter changing
    it's state only to be another sort of matter? And, if yes, how does energy fit in? Was 'your matter' meaning energy
    as well. I hope you don't get my posting as to be too offhand. It's not meant that way.
    Matter can change to energy and gravity and vis versa. Its part of a recycling process that keeps things going and looking younger, oops and looking older.


    Kojax said

    I wonder if the process of the bh driving the jet, causes the bh to lose any energy in total. (Which would be interesting to discuss in the other topic I started on the question of whether a bh can lose energy via its gravity from objects passing it in the right way [outside the event horizon, I mean])
    I think I responded to that in the other post. I will try to do a bit more research on it in due time. Right now I'm reading papers on Neutron matter and quark matter if that matters.
    Smile and live another day
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #47  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    kojax,

    when the universe had a begin it needs to have an end I suppose.


    Harry Costas,

    still, what about energy? You have left out energy so far.

    Steve
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #48  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250
    G'day steve

    I said

    Matter can change to energy and gravity and vis versa. Its part of a recycling process that keeps things going and looking younger, oops and looking older.

    What energy ?
    Smile and live another day
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #49  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Costas
    G'day steve

    I said

    Matter can change to energy and gravity and vis versa. Its part of a recycling process that keeps things going and looking younger, oops and looking older.

    What energy ?
    Oh I'm sorry. I read it but still had in mind what I wanted to ask. Energy changing to gravity
    was quite revolutionary.

    Who cares? It will be all right or wrong at the end anyway.

    Sounds like the universe that has a begin but no end.

    Steve
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #50  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250
    G'day from the land of ozzzzzz


    No start no end.

    I know its a hard pill for "MAN" to swallow.
    Smile and live another day
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #51  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Originally it's 'men'. Maybe that was about it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #52  
    Forum Sophomore GrowlingDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    At the gates of Sto-vo-kor
    Posts
    181
    All i know is, at the end of the universe no one will be around to prove or disprove any argument so i'm going with "At the end of the universe is a sign that says, wrong way, go back". You know like they have on the freeways. Of course i could be wrong.
    Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you react to it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #53  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    That would be quite cool.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #54  
    Forum Sophomore GrowlingDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    At the gates of Sto-vo-kor
    Posts
    181
    Or, maybe its more like a game and at the end of the universe there is a sign that reads, "You have reached the end of the program, please wait for patch 576.8796.9987699 to download before traveling any further."
    Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you react to it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  56. #55  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    don't game
    Reply With Quote  
     

  57. #56  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250
    G'day

    This is becoming a chat room.
    Smile and live another day
    Reply With Quote  
     

  58. #57  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Welcome. Feel free to join in.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  59. #58  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by (Q)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmo

    I am a 'free thinker'.

    I am not 'regimented into an 'educational straight jacket'.

    I seek my own solutions.

    I do respect some experts like ... Arp.
    The qualifiers of your post are self-evident.
    You are selective, picking on Halton Arp.
    Arp has the credentials to be up there with the leaders.

    Be honest. See his two best (my opinion) samples of these anomalous Red Shifts.
    They are, as I said before, NGC 7603 and AM 2054-2210.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  60. #59  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry
    Ok, explain the transition to a black hole?
    I argued this point on other posts. They do not exist. Why?

    Because I think they should be surrounded by a 'halo' of light bent around the 'event horizons'. So with our powerful telescopes, the ones in isolation should have been detected by now in the vicinity of our space area outside the solar system.
    In the past, our galaxy must have had from 5-10 times the blue giants we see today. So where are they?

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  61. #60  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    They are at the very center of a galaxy and I think were spotted on occasion at other places.

    Don't know how it can be at other places(), but a black hole at the center of a galaxy makes
    sense I think.

    What else could it be keeping the galaxy spiraling?

    Steve
    Reply With Quote  
     

  62. #61  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Miller
    They are at the very center of a galaxy and I think were spotted on occasion at other places.

    Don't know how it can be at other places(), but a black hole at the center of a galaxy makes
    sense I think.

    What else could it be keeping the galaxy spiraling?

    Steve
    The central region of our galaxy has been observed with all types of telescopes.
    So all they have detected is hot gases revolving at high velocities to imply the presence of a high mass content.

    However, my opinion is that there is a high concentration of spent stars in the neutron state to account for this high mass density.
    My idea is that the central region of our galaxy is the 'oldest' portion of our galaxy and the hottest area to cause the central regions to cause the stars to evaporate at the fastest rate to create these neutron stars in greater numbers.

    This may sound like speculation but with good reason.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  63. #62  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250
    G'day from the land of ozzzz

    There are millions of stellar black holes through out the milky way. Some stellar black holes are 40,000 times that of our sun and found in globular star clusters in the spiral arms of the MW.

    There is a swam of black holes around the centre, a few in the hundreds and thousands sun masses

    There is a main black hole several million times that of our sun.

    As to the type of matter found in black holes, well that no one really knows.

    It maybe
    Neutron matter compacted to 10^17 kg/m3 (compared to the sun 10Km dia)
    Quark matter composites 10^18 to 10^25 kg/m3 (3m to 300 mm dia)

    Preon particles over 10^25 kg/m3 (300 mm to 5 mm dia) Almost a singularity
    Smile and live another day
    Reply With Quote  
     

  64. #63 Re: End of the universe 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Carbon
    Do you think that the universe has an end?
    Maybe it hasn't..
    Maybe it has.. but how would an end look? not like a wall, huh?
    Please tell me your theorys
    A good question. It will look as it looked when you were in your mother's womb!
    I suspect that beyond our universe there exists other universes. Why we fail to realise the truth is that our body, a substance that decays and degenerates, sets up a tiny limit beyond which we can not understand. It has nothing to do in saying, as some atheist would proclaim, that our knowledge is expanding. Our senses have limitations and many things are unfathomable.
    Maybe once we depart from this earth and take birth in some other distant progressive galaxy we could ultimately realise the truth. Maybe.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  65. #64  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    14
    i think that it is quite possible that the univrse has always been and will always be. our problem is that our lives are so short in comparison to the cosmos, and so we cannot wrap our heads around the concept of infinity. If we lived forever, we would probably have an easier time
    abarat is the best book ever
    Reply With Quote  
     

  66. #65  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250
    G'day from the land of ozzzzzz

    Hello fuzzy

    Keeping it simple

    The universe is all, in infinite time, distance and matter.

    The universe being ALL and all is inifinite, than infinity cannot expand or contract.

    The parts within the universe and particularly the observable universe to us goes through processes that we can observe and study. We notice contraction and expansion in varies forms relating to star formation and galaxy evolution.

    In the past we have been dictated by missleading information and deductions and its only in the last few years that science has been apllied to the issues of cosmology.

    Although some of these issues have been around for many years, Main stream scientists have put them aside for what ever reasons.
    Smile and live another day
    Reply With Quote  
     

  67. #66  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    6
    It is wierd to thing that the universe has no end, unless it somhow looped in through itself by a wormhole like formation and/or folded in itself kind of like a Mobius Strip.
    (OH)CC(OH)C(OH)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  68. #67  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Trying to say there's a beginning is just an attempt to break a large thing up into smaller parts.

    I mean, if we think something happened before that beginning, then there must be something larger than the universe that goes back even further in time than it does. And, if that larger thing has a beginning, then we'll be looking for whatever came before it, and so on....

    We're ultimately describing infinity, no matter which path we choose. Do you want to create an infinitely long list of objects within objects, or just allow one object to have always existed?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  69. #68  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    250
    G'day from the land of ozzzzzz

    Kojax said

    We're ultimately describing infinity, no matter which path we choose. Do you want to create an infinitely long list of objects within objects, or just allow one object to have always existed?
    Thats about right.

    But for one object.

    The parts within the universe will not form one object. A recycling process would prevent such a merger.

    The universe being infinite in time and matter cannot go back to one point. There would not be enough time.
    Smile and live another day
    Reply With Quote  
     

  70. #69  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax
    We're ultimately describing infinity, no matter which path we choose. Do you want to create an infinitely long list of objects within objects, or just allow one object to have always existed?
    I think what you did say was wrong. We don't describe infinity when we create a list of objects in objects. That's not describing infinity. The contrary was the case. Infinity was something unknown rather than known objects.

    It's again a different story if one ever can get there to check for which hypothesis was right. I'm afraid we can not even think on getting there if a wrong hypothesis should be the basis for such attempts.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  71. #70  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    But if it's an infinitely long list?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  72. #71  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax
    But if it's an infinitely long list?
    But it's a list like 123456789101112131415161718..... which was not an infinite long list since the very next number was known always.

    Not like 2,99999999999999999999999999999........... period, that can not be true some how anyway. Somewhere on the same axis must be 3 other wise it's not good for nothing --> towards arguing the sequence of numbers.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  73. #72  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Well, if the list of objects within objects has an end, then what does it terminate with?

    I'm thinking that it would either have to terminate with an object that has an infinitely long past, or an object that can somehow be explained to have literally come into existence out of nothing.

    Otherwise, the list has no terminating point, and by very definition a list that never ends must be infinitely long. It's not a question of knowing what the next number is. It's a question of knowing what the last number is.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  74. #73  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9
    in my opinion there will be no end. new planets, stars and galaxies are forming probably right now and will be probably for the rest of time itself
    Reply With Quote  
     

  75. #74
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9
    hi i dont think this real but what if we were just a big alien game like spore but on a much bigger and better scale ahaha. now that would be funny and yeah imagine at the end of time or the universe, a big GAME OVer sign appeared lol
    Reply With Quote  
     

  76. #75  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3
    I think this is a nice topic to discuss and share various views about the topic. According to my view there will be no end for the Universe. But I read some where that there will be end for it.

    __________________________________________________ __

    Carhartt Outerwear
    investment real estate
    Reply With Quote  
     

  77. #76  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Nealy93
    in my opinion there will be no end. new planets, stars and galaxies are forming probably right now and will be probably for the rest of time itself
    In this BB view, the expansion would continue until the contents are spread out
    so far that they would all evaporate back into hydrogen gas and you would just have a lot of gas ocupying the post BB space. RIP.

    Well, anyway, this would comply with the Conservation of Matter. Ha ha.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  78. #77  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    317
    The universe may end, but theories about the end of the universe will go on forever.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  79. #78  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    35
    You wan to know? life longer n see
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •