Plug Drugs
07-10-2012, 11:46 AM
Our universe has been described as "one brief moment of light, in between two eternities of darkness"; that this is the only universe that exists, or will ever exist -- nothing came before it, and nothing will come after it ends. But is this true?
Whether it be true or false, both possibilities have laws of physics that support the accuracy of one possibility while contradicting the other.
The Law of Conservation of Mass/Energy and Newton's Third Law of Motion would suggest False. "Every action creates an equal and opposite reaction" would suggest that our universe's destruction could only result in another universe's creation, and our universe's creation could have only resulted from the destruction of another universe. "Mass/energy can never be created/destroyed, it can only change from one form to another" would suggest that there could never be "nothing", and will always be "something"; before our universe's creation there had to have been "something", and "something" will always exist since "something" exists right now -- the "something" which exists right now couldn't have been 'created' nor can it be destroyed.
Now, the Third Law of Thermodynamics and Newton's First Law of Motion would suggest True. "Systems irreversibly change from states of lower entropy to higher entropy" would mean that eventually, our universe will reach a point where all the energy within it is evenly distributed, and no more interactions between particles occur. "An object in motion stays in motion unless an outside force acts upon it" would suggest that the particles in our universe will continue to travel outward from their point of origin and the creation of a new universe would never occur.
How did Newton's first law get into it?
And the laws of thermodynamics are not universal. Thus your first scenario applies.
Newton's first law applies to it when you think of the big bang, where all the matter in the universe was rapidly expanding outwards. It should continue to stay on its course outwards, never to return to its point of origin.
This ties in with the idea of entropy, in that eventually, if everything keeps traveling outwards from the point of origin (the center of the universe where the big bang took place), then everything will become so spread out that significant interactions between particles would no longer take place, and the possibility of life would cease.
This depends on what gravity's ultimate role is in the creation and continuation of the universe; will some underlying mechanism responsible for gravity eventually suck everything back in to the point of origin and cause another universe to be created? I sure hope so.
10^100 years (the estimated amount of time our universe has left before experiencing heat death) may seem like a long time, but on the order of eternity it is negligible -- we need eternity's promise of an eternal recurrence of universes in order for life to always continue; otherwise we are a blip of insignificance in everlasting darkness.
Whether it be true or false, both possibilities have laws of physics that support the accuracy of one possibility while contradicting the other.
The Law of Conservation of Mass/Energy and Newton's Third Law of Motion would suggest False. "Every action creates an equal and opposite reaction" would suggest that our universe's destruction could only result in another universe's creation, and our universe's creation could have only resulted from the destruction of another universe. "Mass/energy can never be created/destroyed, it can only change from one form to another" would suggest that there could never be "nothing", and will always be "something"; before our universe's creation there had to have been "something", and "something" will always exist since "something" exists right now -- the "something" which exists right now couldn't have been 'created' nor can it be destroyed.
Now, the Third Law of Thermodynamics and Newton's First Law of Motion would suggest True. "Systems irreversibly change from states of lower entropy to higher entropy" would mean that eventually, our universe will reach a point where all the energy within it is evenly distributed, and no more interactions between particles occur. "An object in motion stays in motion unless an outside force acts upon it" would suggest that the particles in our universe will continue to travel outward from their point of origin and the creation of a new universe would never occur.
How did Newton's first law get into it?
And the laws of thermodynamics are not universal. Thus your first scenario applies.
Newton's first law applies to it when you think of the big bang, where all the matter in the universe was rapidly expanding outwards. It should continue to stay on its course outwards, never to return to its point of origin.
This ties in with the idea of entropy, in that eventually, if everything keeps traveling outwards from the point of origin (the center of the universe where the big bang took place), then everything will become so spread out that significant interactions between particles would no longer take place, and the possibility of life would cease.
This depends on what gravity's ultimate role is in the creation and continuation of the universe; will some underlying mechanism responsible for gravity eventually suck everything back in to the point of origin and cause another universe to be created? I sure hope so.
10^100 years (the estimated amount of time our universe has left before experiencing heat death) may seem like a long time, but on the order of eternity it is negligible -- we need eternity's promise of an eternal recurrence of universes in order for life to always continue; otherwise we are a blip of insignificance in everlasting darkness.