• ramble81@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    At some point wouldn't gravity override the expansion and cause a contraction again?

    • DeadNinja@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      1 year ago

      Last I checked, the "Big Crunch" hypothesis got rejected by scientists.

      I am no expert, so can't elaborate any further.

    • Khavanon@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The effects of gravity spread at the speed of light. If the sun suddenly blinked out of existence, it would take eight minutes to both see it disappear from Earth and notice a change in our planet's motion. In other words, the planet would continue to orbit that empty space in the middle because the sun's gravity, much like it's light, would still be extending out to us.

      The universe is expanding in every part of space all at once. Some places are so far apart that the collective expansion between them is growing at greater distances in a given amount of time than light can travel. And the same can be said for the effects of gravity, but the motion of objects caused by gravity at great distances is far, far slower than the speed of light.

      Our galaxy is moving in a direction that is caused partly by something called "The Great Attractor." But even though it's causing us to move, we will never reach it, and it's influence on us will gradually weaken. And it's not even that far away compared to most of what we know is out there.

      That being said, this news is interesting.

    • Pottsunami@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Heres a great source

      It explains why the universe will have a cold death instead of a heat death.

      Right now the universe is expanding and its expanding faster today than yesterday. Things could change, but current math points to a cold death

      • xanu@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        I always interpreted "heat death" as "the death of heat" instead of "a hot death"

        • Pottsunami@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          You are correct and I misremembered it. "The Big Freeze" and "Heat Death" are the same thing. Thats when everything expands until there is no more heat.

          If someone knows the correct terms for what I am talking about please let me know. Let me explain further.

          What I am talking about is the opposite of heat death, which is somehow in my mind at a hot death? Basically, where everything goes back to one singularity instead of expanding forever.

      • Perfide@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        That IS the heat death of the universe. It's not heat death as in "a wave of heat destroys everything" or anything like that, it's heat death as in "there is no more heat(aka condensed energy), everything is equally cold(aka lack of condensed energy) everywhere. Heat itself is gone, has died".

        • Pottsunami@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That is correct and I misremembered. For some reason a heat death makes me think of going back to a singularity because a singularity would probably be the hottest thing ever. Ironically, a heat death would be really cold

      • MrPoopbutt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        If the gravity is behaving as it is currently understood by the scientific community, it would indeed be unusual.