Ultraviolet & Infrared Light...

[yevaud]

Short answer: no.<br /><br />There is a hypothetical decay time possible for, say a Neutron to decay into it's constituent Quarks, but that time is so long, it exceeds even the wildest possible life-spans for the universe.<br /><br />So, no, everything wouldn't decay.<br /><br />What would happen is by that time, all possible physical processes would have ended. The background temperature would pretty uniformly very low, and there really wouldn't be any more possible "work" that could be performed.<br /><br />This clarify things a bit? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[jatslo]

Thank You Yevaud!<br /><br /><font color="yellow">What would happen is by that time, all possible physical processes would have ended. The background temperature would pretty uniformly very low, and there really wouldn't be any more possible "work" that could be performed.</font><br /><br />You posted a link just recently about particle annihilation within the universe, and the magnitude of gamma rays within the universe suggests that the universe is dissipating in totality.<br /><br />Do you deny this?

 

[yevaud]

It's not "dissipating." What's happening is Entropy. Energy is used, and can't be replaced. But no, there would still be gross physical matter remaining, but all cold and dark. No activity.<br /><br />That's at the core of Entropy. There must be temperature or energy differentials for work to be performed. Once all is uniformly cold and dark, that's at an end.<br /><br />That's why it's frequently referred to as a "dead universe." <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[jatslo]

<font color="yellow">It's not "dissipating." What's happening is Entropy. Energy is used, and can't be replaced. But no, there would still be gross physical matter remaining, but all cold and dark. No activity.</font><br /><br />The alpha and beta particles are balls of plasma that spin and burn up, poof. Why is that not dissipating? Are there gasses involved with alpha and beta particles, and can the gasses be recycled for infinity?<br /><br /><font color="yellow">That's why it's frequently referred to as a "dead universe."</font><br /><br />Okay, that's decay. That makes since!

 

[nacnud]

Argh! I give up. Good bye Jatslo.

 

[yevaud]

<font color="yellow">The alpha and beta particles are balls of plasma that spin and burn up, poof. Why is that not dissipating? Are there gasses involved with alpha and beta particles, and can the gasses be recycled for infinity?</font><br /><br />Because dissipation equals "nothing left." That's not what happens.<br /><br />Look. Matter requires organization, and organization requires energy for work to be performed. Once that energy has been exhausted, it equates to no more "work" possible.<br /><br />But that doesn't imply that everything will just vanish. Not even close.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[jatslo]

<font color="orange">Because dissipation equals "nothing left." that's not what happens.</font><br /><br /><font color="yellow">But there are two major problems with observing the last gasp of a black hole. For one thing, the nearest black holes we know of are light-years away, making accurate measurements of Hawking Radiation nearly impossible. Secondly, black holes take a huge amount of time to <b>evaporate</b>, the time being proportional to their mass. Even relatively small stellar black holes would take longer than the current age of the universe to <b>dissipate</b>, and the monster black holes in the middle of galaxies may be the last things to exist in our universe, taking ten thousand trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion years to die away (sorry, I just have to do that sometimes. That is the actual estimate of how long a massive black hole will last).</font><br /><br />and further on...<br /><br /><font color="yellow">If it makes you feel any more comfortable, we're pretty sure that if the LHC can produce black holes, then so can cosmic rays, high-energy particles that smash into our atmosphere every day. There are probably a few tiny black holes forming and dying far above you right now. So I think we should all relax, fire up the Large Hadron Collider, and get ready for a view of the universe that we've never seen before.</font><br /><br />http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0523/p25s02-stss.html<br /><br />The universe will dissipate, disperse, preventing the masses from organizing, and then what's left will decay, and/or the universe will collapse, thus starting the process over into infinity. <br /><br /><font color="orange">Look. Matter requires organization, and organization requires energy for work to be performed. Once that energy has been exhausted, it equates to no more "work" possible.</font><br /><br />Okay,

 

[yevaud]

The evaporation of a black hole is not even remotely the same thing. By evaporate, they mean "lose energy," which equates to the total mass/energy of the black hole.<br /><br />It's already a black hole. It can't reverse the process, and turn back. So when it reaches the lowest mass-limit in which it can exist as a black hole in our Space/Time, it "detaches" completely. It's just...gone. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[jatslo]

<font color="orange">It's already a black hole. It can't reverse the process, and turn back. So when it reaches the lowest mass-limit in which it can exist as a black hole in our Space/Time, it "detaches" completely. It's just...gone.</font><br /><br />Dissipation is collapse, when the black hole is expanding; the black hole is being fed matter, and its digesting the matter through dissipation. If the rate of consumption is greater than the rate of dissipation, and evaporation, the masses expand; on the flip side, the masses will collapse.<br /><br />Do you deny this?

 

[yevaud]

One might make the point that a black hole doesn't exists through dissipation - it exists through consumption and concentration.<br /><br />Evaporation is possibly the wrong word, because it leads to ideas that aren't correct about black holes. But what you've said is largely correct.<br /><br />But the masses don't "collapse." There's simply a limit on how large a black hole must be to remain. Once that limit is reached, it just goes away. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[jatslo]

And the universe might be a black hole. I will look up entropy too.<br /><br />I'm going to think about that some more, thank you Yevaud.

 

[yevaud]

Speaking of Steven Hawking, he came up with an interesting thought. Look up "wave function of the universe." <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[spacechump]

"The alpha and beta particles are balls of plasma that spin and burn up, poof. Why is that not dissipating? Are there gasses involved with alpha and beta particles, and can the gasses be recycled for infinity? "<br /><br />Huh? No jatslo! An alpha particle is just a helium nuclei striped of its electrons...that's all<br /><br />A beta particle is just a fancy word for an electron...again..that's all. It's when certain decay scenarios happens to a nucleus of an atom.<br /><br />http://www.epa.gov/radiation/understand/alpha.htm<br /><br />http://www.epa.gov/radiation/understand/beta.htm

 

[jatslo]

Quantum, in its ultimate conclusion; allows for the existence of infinite universes, which should not be confused with dimensions, because there is no such thing as ANTI-anything. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> However, <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> someone once mentioned that quantum tunneling involved finding myself orbiting Mars as probability, in which I can now see the plausibility of reality <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />. Let me explain: If my artificial gravity machine, in fact, warps space-time, then I could theoretically spring over to Mars, and occupy the distance between by increasing my length, mass, and time. Of course, the distance is less than displacement; can you see it?

 

[spacechump]

From here <br /><br />10 - " Use the word quantum in a sentence, despite not knowing what it means. For a more impressive effect, use it with the name of your favorite superstition - "quantum dowsing" sure sounds mighty serious."<br /><br />Jatslo you sure make me laugh! Thank you!

 

[newtonian]

jatslo - Infinite universes? If new universes are being created during infinite future time, then there would be infinite universes - but this would be a time dependent infinity.<br /><br />At any given time the number of universes would be finite.<br /><br />And rising.<br /><br />As for the rest of your post - I can't see it in infrared or UV light!

 

[jatslo]

[Physicist Stephen] Hawking is one of the founders of a new scientific discipline called quantum cosmology. At first, this seems like a contradiction in terms. The word quantum applies to the infinitesimally small world of quarks and neutrinos, while cosmology signifies the almost limitless expanse of outer space. However, Hawking and others now believe that the ultimate questions of cosmology can be answered only by quantum theory. Hawking takes quantum cosmology to its ultimate conclusion, allowing the existence of <b>infinite</b> numbers of parallel <b>universes</b>.

 

[jatslo]

Who am I? <img src="/images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> One of the others?