Slashdot Mirror
Past a Certain Critical Temperature, the Universe Will Be Destroyed
StartsWithABang writes: If you take all the kinetic motion out of a system, and have all the particles that make it up perfectly at rest, somehow even overcoming intrinsic quantum effects, you'd reach absolute zero, the theoretically lowest temperature of all. But what about the other direction? Is there a limit to how hot something can theoretically get? You might think not, that while things like molecules, atoms, protons and even matter will break down at high enough temperatures, you can always push your system hotter and hotter. But it turns out that the Universe limits what's actually possible, as any physical system will self-destruct beyond a certain point.
Is there a certain critical limit of Medium.com posts per day before Slashdot is destroyed? Fucking seriously, guys, this is getting out of hand.
... the Bigger Bang.
... Slashdotian time units*.
* A Slashdotian time unit is defined as 1/15th of the time of this post to the universe's self-destruction.
So, you've got a pop-sci article about what happens at high temperature. Let's break down just a few of the failures:
i) It talks about things that have been known for decades - not exactly news.
ii) Talks about phenomena like eternal inflation as though they are fact, rather than quite speculative.
iii) The summary contradicts the article itself claiming a max temp is necessarily imposed.
iv) The article claims that if we convert all the energy in the observable universe to heat we hit a maximum, completely ignoring the fact that cosmology doesn't work with fixed volumes.
v) A maximum temperature contradicts a big bang model - you can argue with a singularity just fine, but no-one has good evidence that we didn't start in one yet. Particularly ironic given the name of the blog...
Weak. Pathetically weak. I guess I shouldn't be shocked - StartsWithABang is always at the wide-eyed woo-woo end of communicating physics but this is SlashDot. We can do better...
Someone has been skipping physics class.
Maybe you should read the article.
Nowhere does it claim that the universe is going to heat up.
Dumbass.
Is there a sarcasm font? It would be easier to tell if you were being sarcastic or are just an epic moron.
(And now i feel dirty for mentioning it)
This guy has anawful lot of confidence in how the universe works, I'll give him that much. I am only a lowly being compared to him, but isn't this all speculation? I'm pretty sure this is not a science with any kind of proof or even basic consistent knowledge, but don't let me get in the way.
"Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
" At some high temperature, you will restore the potential that caused our Universe to inflate, cosmically. Back before the Big Bang, the Universe was undergoing a state of exponential expansion, where space itself was inflating like a cosmic balloon, but at an exponential rate. All the particles, antiparticles and radiation within it was rapidly separated from every other quantum bit of matter and energy, and when inflation came to an end, the Big Bang began.
If you managed to reach temperatures sufficient to bring this field back into its inflating state, you would effectively hit the “reset” button on the Universe, and cause inflation to resume, resulting in the Big Bang starting all over again."
Isaac Asimov posted a column in 1957 asking the same question. The column was subsequently published in a book of his collected scientific columns. A graduate student took the question posed by the column and used it for his doctorate thesis over fifty years ago.
pics or it didn't happen.
And wtf is with all the reposting from medium.com. /. didn't use to carry blogs.
the mass from how many universes will it take to get the energy to explode ours?
seems like something for a xkcd what-if
or wait... "global warming!"
Instaclose!
"3.) At some high temperature, you will restore the potential that caused our Universe to inflate, cosmically."
Didn't they recently debunk the theory of inflation and the Big Bang?
"How many universes does it take to change a light bulb? Wait... that's wrong. I think it goes like this: How many astronomers does it take to change all of the light bulbs in the changing universe? Nope, that's not the joke either. I'll send another message when I remember the joke."
just won't go away, will it?
I believe the grandonymous one was executing a clever parody of global war..., er, climate change.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Old: global warming
New: universal warming
There's nothing wrong with the idea that inflation might kick-off between 10^28 and 10^29 that we know about, but for any region of spacetime large enough for that to be an issue, the region should become enclosed by an event horizon. In other words, every black hole may contain its own reality. Which comports nicely with the idea that our universe is almost precisely at the critical density. Secondly, I find it much more interesting to wonder what happens when large enough regions of the universe have low enough energies. Will there be another phase transition? We're not just talking cold, we're talking cold with densities on the order of a couple of atoms in a volume the size of our visible universe AND hypercold. If there's no big rip (itself a phase transition in slow motion), that is the future.
"...the Universe will be destroyed." Duh. You think?
Extremely bad news for the UN IPCC whose Super Duper Super Human Super Computational "models" can't replicate ANYTHING let alone a particular state of "climate".
Why! The UN IPCC relies on Geographers for the computational programming and electronic engineering building of their Super Duper Super Computational Machines.
Well, several 10s of thousands of people have known all along that the UN IPCC is a FAKE and fucked but they are standing on the road-side and waiting for the UN General Secretary Emperor of the World to be Hit by a Budweiser Beer Truck as he staggers across the streets toward Tudor City Place and ground into the pavement so that ravens can fest on his rotting flesh.
Ha ha
We're discussing explosives theory here, kids... get the Ammonia Nitrate bottle ready after you learn that formula, otherwise all you'll think about is how much heat it takes to make things go away..
If you do heat the universe up to the point it all explodes, the thing giving the heat will be cold enough to survive.
.... nuff said.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
Michael Stevens version was better
Alien version of M.A.D. Just hope suicidal terrorists don't get a hold of it.
Table-ized A.I.
However, failed people like James E. Hansen and Bon Ki Moon will be rushing out to have a few ribs and a vertebra removed so they can curl-up and suck their peen while vigorously inserting a plastic peen up their ass hole in synchronized motion.
Ha ha
It doesn't "Self Destruct" it just no longer behaves as it does at lower temperatures. Just like how solid water (Ice) doesn't "Self destruct" it changes phase and its physical properties and attributes become different. Same thing even at the far end of the spectrum, matter just behaves differently even if it ceases to be mater.
-S
Temperature is dependant on the speed of molecules. If molecules are moving at the speed of light, then the temperature can not get any higher?
http://alamar.webege.com
Just assume that it's not worth your time. It's much easier that way.
Required reading for internet skeptics
random fluctuations in matter will ensure that the universe will never end...and since I am a cryonicist, that means I will be immortal..while you will be eaten by the worm....
FTFA:
Would such a temperature have to be above or below the Planck temperature? If an object were to reach the temperature of 1.41 x 10^32 Kelvin, the radiation it would emit would have a wavelength of 1.616 x 10^26 nanometers (Planck length). Beyond that, if there's even a beyond, is the behaviour of matter even predictable at all?
Whoosh
So we've gone from Global warming to Universal warming now?
I've read/scanned one of his articles, that won't happen again. He was saying the Universe has always existed and always will (Steady State theory) and proving it, under the guise of what if.
I feel so limited. I hate this Universe!
Just that you've been TOLD they can't and have believed that is true, never needing to check it.
Pyromaniacs, like other dedicated individuals, need goals.
And global warming will do this by the year 2020.
Quick!
Give the story to James E. Hansen, Michael E. Mann and Jim Jones.
97% of the populus of the Earth have written off Climate Science as fraud.
With this new Catastrophe looming Hansen will come through to save the Climate Science Fraudsters day.
Hansen in a future (about 30 minutes) press release: "With our new data we can say that with the mean temperature of Earth reaches 2 deg. C. the UNIVERSE will DIE."
Ha ha
how boring. .. hot.
a non-linear and thus more interesting explanation would be:" past 10'000 K everything turns into a magnet!"
that would be cool, errr
I believe the grandonymous one was executing a clever parody of global war..., er, climate change.
Well, no, it was a parody of climate change denialists.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
According to all of the climate guys, it is going to cook to death. And they have proof. Just ask them. But don't question their "science": you'll be squashed into oblivion.
I would be willing to present the extenuating circumstances for your perusal.
Since I was defending the Firstposter, rather than seeking the self-gratifying adulation of a crafty original posit, I submit the punishment be mitigated to a stern look and a frown of short duration.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
If a parody is indistinguishable from a troll does it become a troll?