The Death of A Universe

ninthwave writes "The Guardian is running an article on research into the visible effects of entropy in the Universe. Alan Heavens of The University of Edinburgh did the research also posted at The Royal Astronomical Society with this article" I dunno - expansion, heat death - it all reminds me of a teacher who said "I'm not a premillenialist, postmillenialist - I'm a pan-millenialist, as in it's all going to pan out in the end." Update: 08/18 16:36 GMT by S : Headline fixed.

Comments

U of E

[GMontag]

Doesn't this guy also go on to invent transparent aluminum then come back to the present and give away the formula to a fabricator in San Francisco?

"Computer! Oh computer?"

Job description

[SnappingTurtle]

Just the other day I was told I couldn't put "minimize entropy" as my job description where I work. Now look what's happening. I'm going to take this article to my boss and say "I told you so!"

Gravity and Heat

[TuataraShoes]

The reality is that we know so little about the universe that we can't even account for 90% of the gravity in our own galaxy. We call it dark matter because we can't see it anywhere but we need it to balance the visible mass against the visible size and rotation of the Milky Way.
We have only just begun to think about the shape of the universe. As in... What is at the edge, and what is beyond that? Or does it curl around in a sort of 11 dimentional sphery type thing. Figuring out the total heat or mass in the universe is still way beyond us.
We don't yet have a theory of gravity that works for the galaxy, or fits with electromagnetic and nuclear forces.

Interesting, but I don't put much faith into it.

[I'm a racist.]

The fact is, we are rather unsure of what will happen as the universe ends.

When I was an undergraduate, my astrophysics and cosmology courses went into a number of models. The problem isn't that any of these models are inherently wrong. The real problem is that we don't have the observational evidence to choose and properly parameterize any particular model. Hasn't anyone else noticed the constant influx of observations that favor one model or another? I don't think these observations are necessarily wrong either, they are just pushing our techniques to their limits.

Not long ago, a new and very interesting model was published. It fits well with observations. Anyone with a passing interest in cosmology and/or string theory should read that paper, it's very short and easily digestable. This idea is, of course, very interesting. Is it actually the way the universe works? Hmmm, I don't know. We just don't have the observational capability to say with a high degree of certainty how the universe will evolve on a long timescale.

Sure, I like hearing about the latest measurements and calculations. But, I take it all with a megaparsec-scale cloud of sodium. It's interesting, but not too meaningful, most of the time.

This debate is definitely going to go on for some years to come. In fact, it may well not have a good answer for 5-15 gigayears.

Re:"An Universe"?

[Goody]

You must be new here...

aaaahhh, forget it..

I, for one, welcome our grammar-challenged Slashdot Editor overlords.

The Last Question

[sICE]

Interrestingly enough, Isaac Asimov already told us just that.

Re:"An Universe"?

[TheShadow]

"But language is an evolving invention of the people and not a set of rules defended by an elite crackerjack force of grammar gnomes."

Tell that to the French.

*rimshot*

Earth not to be engulfed!

[Luyseyal]

The sun will swell to become a red giant until it engulfs Earth.

Actually, it's been recently shown (1, 2) that Earth could survive Sol's expansion, though it would be really frickin' hot!

-l