Death of universe preventable?

I'm not sure this is the right section.. maybe philosophy is, because it's all so speculative with no real way to answer it right now as far as I'm aware.

The ultimate goal of life is to just survive. First a form of life has to overcome barriers on it's planet to keep living, and then on a large enough timeline they have to develop enough to be capable of avoiding or preventing any threats from outter space, or have the means to do a mass relocation if necessary. Ultimately in theory though, that is possible.

But even then you don't have potential to survive forever because eventually the entire universe is going to die (the big freeze is the current most accepted theory for that, right?)

Since the death of the universe doesn't just happen for no reasons, and there are causes for it.. would it then be possible for a form of life to become so advanced and widespread (or maybe even work with other forms of life) to come up with ways to prevent and/or reverse the causes leading to the death of the universe in order to continue to survive?

Do you think that given enough time for advancement a form of life could develop the skills to preserve the entire universe, or at least a portion of it, and open the potential to live for an infinite amount of time?

There are many theories about how the universe could end. There was a show I saw (can't remember the name) that explained one of the theories. It was something along the lines of a recurring big bang, where the universe was created by the big bang theory, but it reaches a point where it collapses in on itself like a dying star, and then expands again. Think of it like a really slow heart beat, one that takes billions, possibly trillions, of years to complete. If this theory is correct, then it would seem impossible. But the big freeze theory makes a lot more sense, and seems to be more practical to slow/stop the process. The universe's dimensions make it almost impossible for an organism to travel across enough of it to preserve and prevent the inevitable downfall, whichever way it may happen. But there is just so much that is unknown so who knows? For all I know there could be a species of organism that has technology to travel fast and prevent the death of our universe.

Yeah the big crunch theory would make it a lot harder to prevent, and you wouldn't be able to preserve any part of the universe either. But I think that theory has been given up on since we learned that the rate the universe is expanding at is accelerating faster and faster instead of slowing down.

Shame though, since that seems like the coolest theory for the end

Or you could just move to another universe... assuming there are tons of them popping up all the time.

Is anyone here involved professionally with cosmology? I have a question that I'd like to ask via PM. Thanks:)

MelT

The ultimate goal of life is to just survive. First a form of life has to overcome barriers on it's planet to keep living, and then on a large enough timeline they have to develop enough to be capable of avoiding or preventing any threats from outter space, or have the means to do a mass relocation if necessary. Ultimately in theory though, that is possible.

there isn't really an "ultimate goal of life." That's kinda like saying the ultimate goal for a star is to create heavier elements. Things that want to prevent their deaths though, yes. They will come up with ways to keep their species from being killed off.

But even then you don't have potential to survive forever because eventually the entire universe is going to die (the big freeze is the current most accepted theory for that, right?)

I suppose you could call it a freeze. Over a long enough time scale all elements will give off their parts in order to try and heat the rest of the universe and eventually there won't be any elements left to do that.

Since the death of the universe doesn't just happen for no reasons, and there are causes for it.. would it then be possible for a form of life to become so advanced and widespread (or maybe even work with other forms of life) to come up with ways to prevent and/or reverse the causes leading to the death of the universe in order to continue to survive?

no, only because it's the very atoms themselves that are decaying. No matter what you build to help prevent it that very thing you built is what is decaying away.

Do you think that given enough time for advancement a form of life could develop the skills to preserve the entire universe, or at least a portion of it, and open the potential to live for an infinite amount of time?

I think it would be easier for that life form to develop a way to go to another universe (assuming string theory and multi-verse are real). Keep in mind though that the death of the universe will take a very very long time. As in the majority of the rest of the life of the universe is still to come. If it were a baby inside the womb you would only just be able to tell that it is a child compared to the span of that child's life.

I think it would be easier for that life form to develop a way to go to another universe (assuming string theory and multi-verse are real). Keep in mind though that the death of the universe will take a very very long time. As in the majority of the rest of the life of the universe is still to come. If it were a baby inside the womb you would only just be able to tell that it is a child compared to the span of that child's life.

More like the sperm just left the penis. The universe is 14-15 billion years old, the heat death eventuality would theoretically take trillions and trillions of years - the baby better get fucking comfortable, because it's going nowhere!

So given how early we are in the universes lifespan.. you don't think we (or another life form that's out there) could (theoritically, given time) devise a way to prevent atom/proton decay?

So given how early we are in the universes lifespan.. you don't think we (or another life form that's out there) could (theoritically, given time) devise a way to prevent atom/proton decay?

This would contradict the 2nd law of thermodynamics, which, as far as we can understand and test scientifically (rigorously, i might add), is not possible.

We go down to the quarks (the tinier particles making up protons, neutrons, and electrons) I suppose. But realistically the human race is developing at a fast enough rate that I wouldn't be surprised if something similar to halo did happen (not necessarily an interspecies war or discovery of aliens) where we have colonized other plantets within the next 500 years. If our species continues at that rate in a million years from now we will be travelling between galaxies.

It really all depends how the human race does within this time. If we invest our time in scientific discovery instead of shitty entertainment and cheap mechendise, then we likely will acheive this goal.

We go down to the quarks (the tinier particles making up protons, neutrons, and electrons) I suppose. But realistically the human race is developing at a fast enough rate that I wouldn't be surprised if something similar to halo did happen (not necessarily an interspecies war or discovery of aliens) where we have colonized other plantets within the next 500 years. If our species continues at that rate in a million years from now we will be travelling between galaxies.

It really all depends how the human race does within this time. If we invest our time in scientific discovery instead of shitty entertainment and cheap mechendise, then we likely will acheive this goal.

Terra-forming other planets, and cultivating resources within our solar system i totally agree with; very possible and with advancements in technology, wholly likely and logical, given our current resource detriment. However, that in it self holds a problem - can we salvage enough fuel to make these trips viable?
Inter galactic commuting is another dilemma though. Even if we could, somehow, manage to design a ship that could travel close to light speed, the closest Galaxy of Andromeda is still 2.5 million light years away. Unless we discover a method of manipulating the very fabric of space and time, we are forever stuck in the milky way.

Terra-forming other planets, and cultivating resources within our solar system i totally agree with; very possible and with advancements in technology, wholly likely and logical, given our current resource detriment. However, that in it self holds a problem - can we salvage enough fuel to make these trips viable?
Inter galactic commuting is another dilemma though. Even if we could, somehow, manage to design a ship that could travel close to light speed, the closest Galaxy of Andromeda is still 2.5 million light years away. Unless we discover a method of manipulating the very fabric of space and time, we are forever stuck in the milky way.

We have until the universe ends to figure this out my friend, I'm sure someone will come up with someting.

We have until the universe ends to figure this out my friend, I'm sure someone will come up with someting.

I enjoy the harmonious and utopian sentiment of a human race which doesn't destroy itself before then. I'm not sure if i subscribe to it though.

I don't know how we could survive the death of the universe, but i know for certain that we will be the species that gives birth to "God". I will elaborate when I get the time.

While I have great respect for the advances in science, I still have trouble with the idea of the universe ending.

We don't know what caused the big bang and we definatly don't know that Tue big freeze will happen.

Can the universe really die? I doubt it, there is probly a cycle

Terra-forming other planets, and cultivating resources within our solar system i totally agree with; very possible and with advancements in technology, wholly likely and logical, given our current resource detriment. However, that in it self holds a problem - can we salvage enough fuel to make these trips viable?
Inter galactic commuting is another dilemma though. Even if we could, somehow, manage to design a ship that could travel close to light speed, the closest Galaxy of Andromeda is still 2.5 million light years away. Unless we discover a method of manipulating the very fabric of space and time, we are forever stuck in the milky way.

Right now the fuel thing would be a problem.. but I'd imagine by the time we reached that point that we'd be using a much more efficient fuel.

I hear dark matter could be used as fuel theoretically. If that's actually possible, and we figure out how to do it, then the fuel thing wouldn't be an issue for any space travels

While I have great respect for the advances in science, I still have trouble with the idea of the universe ending.

We don't know what caused the big bang and we definatly don't know that Tue big freeze will happen.

Can the universe really die? I doubt it, there is probly a cycle

As long as the universe continues to expand, I'm pretty sure we do know that the big freeze will happen. It only makes sense.

At some point the universe will die, and I don't think anything that can be done about it. When it does die, maybe the matter that is left over will be recycled and used by another universe. I think that would be pretty cool.

watch all 5 video's

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZfzvqZcLm4]End of the Earth in Universe (part 1 of 5) - YouTube[/ame]

As long as the universe continues to expand, I'm pretty sure we do know that the big freeze will happen. It only makes sense.

At some point the universe will die, and I don't think anything that can be done about it. When it does die, maybe the matter that is left over will be recycled and used by another universe. I think that would be pretty cool.

Well think back about 20 years. The universe will eventually collapse under gravity. It only makes sense.

Remember that the image of distant galaxies is very old. A galaxy a million light years appears to us as it did a million years ago. We know the universe has been expanding but we don't know if it "currently" is expanding. It is the logical conclusion based onbthe fact the further away galaxies are more red shifted but we can't confirm it since we can't see the galaxies as they are now

Hm? It's provable that the universe is still expanding faster. And the universe collapsing doesn't seem logical because of that. Even if it weren't expanding, it still wouldn't be the most logical guess as to the end of the universe. Still an awesome idea thougb