this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2025
1255 points (98.9% liked)
Science Memes
17162 readers
2924 users here now
Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.
Rules
- Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
- Keep it rooted (on topic).
- No spam.
- Infographics welcome, get schooled.
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
Research Committee
Other Mander Communities
Science and Research
Biology and Life Sciences
- !abiogenesis@mander.xyz
- !animal-behavior@mander.xyz
- !anthropology@mander.xyz
- !arachnology@mander.xyz
- !balconygardening@slrpnk.net
- !biodiversity@mander.xyz
- !biology@mander.xyz
- !biophysics@mander.xyz
- !botany@mander.xyz
- !ecology@mander.xyz
- !entomology@mander.xyz
- !fermentation@mander.xyz
- !herpetology@mander.xyz
- !houseplants@mander.xyz
- !medicine@mander.xyz
- !microscopy@mander.xyz
- !mycology@mander.xyz
- !nudibranchs@mander.xyz
- !nutrition@mander.xyz
- !palaeoecology@mander.xyz
- !palaeontology@mander.xyz
- !photosynthesis@mander.xyz
- !plantid@mander.xyz
- !plants@mander.xyz
- !reptiles and amphibians@mander.xyz
Physical Sciences
- !astronomy@mander.xyz
- !chemistry@mander.xyz
- !earthscience@mander.xyz
- !geography@mander.xyz
- !geospatial@mander.xyz
- !nuclear@mander.xyz
- !physics@mander.xyz
- !quantum-computing@mander.xyz
- !spectroscopy@mander.xyz
Humanities and Social Sciences
Practical and Applied Sciences
- !exercise-and sports-science@mander.xyz
- !gardening@mander.xyz
- !self sufficiency@mander.xyz
- !soilscience@slrpnk.net
- !terrariums@mander.xyz
- !timelapse@mander.xyz
Memes
Miscellaneous
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
We think. We still haven't solved things like the dark matter/energy problem. The answer to that alone could drastically change what we estimate will happen in the distant future.
I mean, have you considered that the expansion of the universe generates or increases the total energy in the universe?
As stars move apart, they gain both potential energy with respect to other stars, because greater distance from gravity sources means greater potential energy, but they also gain kinetic energy as they accelerate away from other objects. So, their mechanical energy (potential + kinetic energy) increases over time. Maybe somebody could build a clever machine out of this to harvest that energy?
You should look up Penrose's work in conformal cyclic cosmology.
The short version is this: as the rarified universe becomes massless particles flying in all directions as space expands, it is basically the exact same conditions as the big bang. IE, when the universe fizzles out, from a different reference frame it's still an infinite field of energy expanding out faster and faster.
Just cross out the "distance" part of interactions between particles, without humans or anything with mass really to observe or interact with anything, the relationships between photons are all that matters, and from that perspective it will be the same as the big-bang state. All that's important to look at is the relationships between these particles, the angles between them and probability of them interacting with each other.
IIRC, the current theory is that stars do not move apart, but that space itself expands, which generates the impression that they move apart.
Stuff only burns for so long. We might learn more about the geometry of space and that there is more out there at greater distances where maybe even other Big bangs are possible but there is a certain maximum amount of time that a star can exist.
Over the time scales of the life of a proton the maximum variability in the amount of time a star can burn is a rounding error against the scale of numbers needed to express the amount of time it takes for hawking radiation to reduce black holes to ultra long wavelengths of infrared radiation.
Yes, but we don't have proof that universe can't generate new matter. For all we know there is a mechanism in universe not yet observed that can create new matter out of little vacuum and more stars will keep forming.
So technically all we can say is, it's likely that stars will die out in 1000 trillion years.
True... we also don't have proof there isn't a tea pot orbiting our Sun since it's creation, either.
However, there's also a complete lack of evidence of it.
You cannot prove a negative. The evidence says no new matter can be created. No evidence that new matter gets created. Therefore, we work on the model of no new matter creation.
On these scales, the accuracy of our observations should reduce our confidence though. It doesn't make sense to confidently say that, in 200 trillion years there will be no stars, because our observations of the rate of new matter creation (approximately zero) have a margin of error which allows for there to still be some
Until evidence shows otherwise, new matter being created doesnt fit our observations.
Go prove that wrong! Win yourself a Nobel prize in physics! That's what science is about!
New matter being created with extremely low probability fits perfectly with our observations.
A teapot created with out solar system orbiting the sun fits our models, with an extremely low probability.
However, we dont work on that assumption being true.
I do also want to point out that stuff like "The conservation of energy" law, in other words, that energy cannot be created or destroyed, does not hold for our universe with our current models. An expanding universe violates the time-translation symmetry
This is our current models. This is what our current physics says. And we know it's incomplete.
When it comes to scientific predictions, you always, always, need the caveat, "under our current model of".
Space itself expanding doesnt, however...
So if all the existing matter came from the big Bang, is it possible to condense it all back into one place?
pretty sure that is the big crunch hypothesis
Sure! Big crunch is a possibility! Crunch or heat death, all matters on how much matter is in the universe.
Google "big crunch hypothesis"
But in this case, this “theory” has a precedent. This energy and matter we have now must have come from somewhere. Whatever your personal belief on the matter is, what’s to say that event can’t happen again? If a god created the universe, then surely he can pump some more into it.
Matter and energy can be converted. So, its possible it was never created, it just always was.
That’s something I’ll never be able to understand. Something having no beginning. Just like I’ll never be able to understand a moment before the big bang, or at the moment of the singularity, where time did could not exist. If there’s no time, how can anything, like the big bang, happen? Unfortunately the singularity is something we know nothing about whatsoever, and probably will never know.
like how we thought black holes were ever-growing inescapable masses and then we learned about hawking radiation.
We also haven't tried every possible configuration of atoms to see if anything creates a portal to an infinite energy dimension or a perpetual motion machine or something we can use to make our own stars
Infinite energy is cheating. Same with travelling backwards in time.
My intuition tells me the universe doesn't allow cheaters.
But then I'm just an evolved bag of water cells clinging onto a clump of rock so what the fuck do I know?
Time travel is allowed for under our current models. Or rather, time travel doesn't affect most parts of the current models, so it's not cheating.
We can only time travel to the future or i am wrong?
Currently yes, but there's nothing inherent in there that's says there's no way for us to move backwards
I once reas a theory abou you needing to go faster than the speed of light which is not possible theorically
PS: i am not a scientist i don't know much, only some basic shit i learned for curiosity
Yeah for all we know stars are black hole poop
Nah, that's the heavier elements.
wait, i thought the heavier elements were star poop, and black holes poop either electrons or positrons i can't remember.
Only up to iron is star poop. Anything heavier tends to be created by novae of various sizes. Technically nothing comes from the black hole, but many of the very heavy elements are birthed along side black holes.
Gravity and time come from every black hole. Neither of those are "things" in the sense that they aren't matter. So don't think I'm saying that you are any kind of wrong. Perhaps "thing" might be to vague to be technically accurate, though.
Everyone here seems oblique in a vision of nothing in perspective, though. Come on, where do you think a big bang came from?
There's a cap limit to the size of a black hole because it will pop. Moreover, "The" is rather an inappropriate reference to a big bang. You might say "our" but infinity doesn't mean what you think it means. Not due to any "limit" but due to math through adjacent dimensions you're only just start to deduce the "obvious" nature of and think to look at. "How" is a whole other Giggle Maestro.
If you need to understand how many dimensions there are...then you will never stop looking. Infinity is way more than we can but get a notion of.