As the universe continues to cool, could it undergo more episodes of spontaneous symmetry breaking?
469547
"the universeitnt[sic] cooling, the total energy of the universe is a constant. but everything is in a constant state of increseing entropy, or disorder. but this is also in a constant equilibrium with enthalpy, order."\n\nAlthough the energy in the universe is a constant (probably, let's not discuss antimatter), it is cooling (probably, again), because the same energy constant is spread over more area.  Apply say 400J of heat energy to a litre of water and it will warm x degrees, apply  400J (Same amount of energy) to x degree's, it will warm to a higher temperature. Add water to the second scenario, and you have an expanding universe. The reason space is a little above absolute zero is because heat from the beginning singularity ("big bang" perhaps) has reached the area (background microwave radiation) and has heated this space a little, therefore, I beleive it is likely the average temperature accross the universe must have dropped.\n\nI cannot comment on the likelyhood of S.S.B. due to the falling temperature, but have fun with the formulas on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_symmetry_breaking .
434444
Yes.\n\nSome one had to actively create the universe, because a system left on its own would become more chaotic and that's not the case since we have evolution which is creating more order out of things.
5808
Nobody really knows for sure.\n\nThere's a theory that the universe is expanding in a spherical shape and will continue to expand until it reaches maximum entropy. At that point all of the energy and matter in the universe will be equally distributed and the universe will no longer be able to support life.\n\nThere's another theory that the universe will expand (again, roughly in the shape of a sphere) until all of the galaxies exhaust their kinetic energy. At that point the universe will begin contracting. When the contracting is complete a singularity containing all of the mass in the universe will form and explode in a big bang.\n\nIf you think about it, if the latter theory is true then it's possible that the universe has expanded and collapsed an infinite number of times in the past!
770862
Well astronomers think the expansion of the universe is actually accelerating, so what you are proposing probably will never come to pass.  Anyway for a civilization to survive a "big crunch" if it happened, would have to far far far more advanced then anything we could possibly imagine.
387616
Originally it was thought that the expansion of the Universe was slowing, and would eventually stop, reverse, and end in a "big crunch".  Now it appears as if the expansion is not only *not* slowing, it's actually accelerating!  As close as we can tell, this expansion will continue until the Universe dies of cold-when the reaction potential reaches zero, and all the energy is lost either to waste heat or inert matter.  However, it is clear we have a very poor understanding of the Universe and what it is composed of, and the forces that drive it (the expansion, for example, seems to require a new force that opposes gravity).  There is also the possibility that humans, or some other intelligent species, will over the next few billion years, achieve enough knowledge and power to change the fate of the Universe.
990294
The scientific theory is that the Universe started as a fluctuation of the vacuum. Such vacuum fluctuations make appear a small amount of energy, for a small time. This phenomenon is responsible for the existence of forces, that hold the Universe and matter together.\n\nNormally the bigger the energy fluctuation, the smaller the time it is in existence.\n\nNot so the Big Bang. That was a HUGE fluctuation. So big that a lot of energy came to appearance in the form of mass, elementary particles. These particles started expanding, before the vacuum could reclaim the energy.\n\nAnd it is still expanding today. 14 billion years later.\n\nThe Big Bang theory itself, doesn't say anything about the *cause* of the explosion. It describes only how the Universe evolved after the explosion took place.\n\nNow for some speculation. Is our Universe the only one? Maybe not. The Big Bang was one big fluctuation, maybe other smaller or bigger, take place all the time.\nBut most of these fluctuations will produce Universes in which conditions are just not suitable for life.\nThe Universe we observe is by necessity one in which the conditions are just right for us to have evolved into Homo Sapiens capable of asking philosophical questions.
1075314
The current status of the universe actually does work like that.  Technically, with gravity the universe should collapse back upon itself and the big bang would occur all over again.  However, gravity is one of the weakest forces in the universe.  With that said, it has been measured that the universe is expanding and accelerating at a rate that exceeds the gravitational forces required to initiate the "big crunch."\n\n\nThere are two schools of thought right now.  One is that the universe will continue to decelerate but never completely stop or collapse upon itself.  More recent theories have stated that the universe appears to be accelerating.\n\nAs it stands now, I would say that it is safe to say that the odds are extremely low of the universe collapsing back to a singularity.\n\nSee the link below for some more information.
647430
I have indeed considered this. The problem is scientific observation has not agreed with the concept of random quantum mechanics created all the matter in the universe.\n\nThe problem with this idea is how do you explain massive concentrations of matter like Suns. if you want to say random particles colided together and created the massive volume that is a sun then fine. How long would such a thing take? With all the suns in our Galaxy alone how is that possible especially considering you only have about a billion year window before most of your stars start dieing off their is simply too much matter.\n\nWhat is far more likely is the Big Bang. The reason I say this is because of two critical observations. The fact that distant Galaxy's are moving away from us at a constant rate or what is called red shift. If the Universe was formed by random particles why is their a constant drift from a center point? \n\nThe second point is because of what is called cosmic radiation. The theory put out was if at one time the universe was smaller and hotter then their would be cosmic radiation and space would be about 2-4 Kelvin and that's exactly what we found. If what you are saying is true then the temperature of the universe should be at absolute zero.\n\nIf you wish I could recommend some books on the subject.
100380
The universe has been shown to be decaying.  It is going from an orderly state to a disorderly state.  This is called entropy.\n\nThere is no known natural force or law in the universe that reverses this.  On a small scale, we can see that our intelligence reverses disorder temporarily.\n\nTherefore, on a universal scale, there must be an intelligence (obviously an intelligence far beyond ours) with the power to set the universe in order to start with.  These are two of the attributes of God.\n\nSo, yes, order in the universe is a proof of God.\n\n-------------------------\n\nTo address some flaws in a previous answer's argument:\n\nThe "Laws of nature" are just another way of saying "the rules of order."  And like any procedure, someone makes the rules.  Like a basketball game, there could be any set of rules, but the ones that are used are what distinguish it from being a hockey game.  And these rules were decided upon by intelligent beings.\n\nAlso, it is not true that all things must lead to infinite regression.  Infinite regression is only one possibility; the other is infinite existence -- in other words, God.
402813
No, I think it'll take too long for them to join together.  They're generally so far apart that the gravitational pull on each other is very very small.  Besides, the universe is constantly expanding, so instead we'll end up in a position where everything is just cold and the density of matter is very small.  That's just one theory, though.
596458
The short answers are:\n\nNobody really knows,\n\nand,\n\nYes, it's possible the universe is collapsing.\n\nIn fact, it's amazing how little we really "know" about the universe.\n\nOf course that just encourages people to propose more theories. After all, to get a Phd you only have to write a thesis, you don't have to prove it! Yes, you have to "defend" it, but that's not the same as proof.\n\n"The Big-Bang", "String Theory" (proposed to prevent the Big-Bang from collapsing) and "Steady-state Universe" are all conjectures based on imagination. So far, there is only contradictory evidence to support any of these theories. We'll have to await the next Einstein to sort it all out!\n\nBy the way, what has Hawking contributed to cosmology? I've read his stuff, and all he does is elaborate on other's thinking. Just like Carl Sagan. I think both are overrated and unoriginal.
202172
It hasn't been observed, if that's what you mean by proven, but it is a widely accepted idea because the theoretical underpinnings are very solid.  I don't think anyone contests the idea much these days.  If we're lucky, when the LHC at CERN comes on line in late 2007, we may be able to make microsingularities and watch them evaporate, giving direct proof of Hawking radiation.
130701
there are infinite many states of matter but scientists have discovered a few of them. . .
588286
i don't know... this is all theoretical, and i would guess that this either \na- does not and cannot happen, or\nb- happens all the time and is therefore not something to be concerned about\n\ndid you read The Elegant Universe by Brian Greene? or Fabric of the Cosmos? (same author) \nI suggest these for further understanding of the string theory.... without having to consider the complexities of the mathematics behind it.
407630
Very good.  You are close to the truth.\n\nSpace alternately expands and contracts over a two billion year cycle.\n\nWe are now nearing the end of the expansionary phase.  So all the scientists on primitive planets hypothesize a big bang and talk about red shift.\n\nIn the following phase, scientists on other primitive planets will hypotehsize a fiery, incandescent end in the middle of everything and talk a lot about blue shifts.\n\nThe reasons for this have to do with the benefits of dynamic equilibrium.  Static would not work.  Apparently God already knows about this, but so do some physicists.\n\nSoem Dutch guy named DeSitter was also close, I have heard.
1866
According to superstrign theory there is a maximum temperture at which point time itslef would break down just as the molecules do in an ice cube to become water. It is reckoned that at about 1 million million million million milllion million million million degrees celcius (a temperture hotter than the big bang), the universe would burn and a hole would be made in space-time.
631342
it depends on the exoansion of the universe. if it is expanding too fast for gravity of all the bodies to pull it back together, eventually it will spread out so far that there will be no motion and the entire universe will reach absolute 0 temperature. but, if gravity can eventually reverse the expansion of the universe, everything will be suckiked into 1 black hole and return to a singularity, like it began at the big bang. this will have basically infinite temperature. the first case is ice, the second fire. i think some scientists measured the expansion and they think it will shrink eventually, going back to a dot, but i dont think they were really sure.