At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
okay i am sorry, but it had read this a few months ago, and its phenomenal. probably will explain much better than me iin my own words. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_fate_of_the_universe
i've read wikipedia regarding that matter and i found there some quite interesting information in the past times too, but i wante is to share with you guys and to know what are your views by the simple fact that there isn't only one theory about that but four.!!
hmm yes, right. i thought so. well, i am quite of the big crunch theory, or the "big squeeze" as i like to call it (ever since i once imagined it, even before i had read about it). very realistic statement that, about the density of the earth being sufficient to cause the slowing down of the expansion process, and ultimately, we go reverse-gear!!
i see the position that your taking. so, do you mind sharing with me what pushes you on going for the big crunch instead of the big rip or the big freez? preciselly the hypothesis of the earth having an impact on the whole universal acceleration fo expension.
okay, pardon me if i am talking like a stupid guy, cause i am relatively very new to reading things on the above subject, and i need to know a LOT. probably @jamesj should be here instead of me. okay see, ofcourse when we are talking about universe, its pretty different, but i like to believe in the "cycle" or "reversibility" of things. i have this feeling that the universe is not going to expand forever, and the critical density theory supports this to an extent. now, how do we go back again.? we crunch again, to the size of the pin head that the universe was at the time of the big bang. ofcourse when a new big bang happens, doesnt necessarily mean that the sub-atomic particles (like quarks) will be formed the same way as they were in the previous cycle. may be there will be a whole new system. but then as i said, i am almost "illiterate" in this topic.. i just have my own view for now. @jamesj for more!
no.!!your not sounding stupid at all. i myself am no good in that field, by the way that the reason why it's an open discussion.!, we share ideas and come up with something tangible. can you please consider checking about dark energy and dark matter and their effects on the acceleration? and if you've already read about'em what is your view on their impact on it?
i have an idea about dark energy and dark matter, and i read a wee bit of descriptions about them, but am not too sure. i 'll do one thing.. i ll read up as much as i can for now, and then try to give an opinion on it. :)
that's a good one. am looking forward to that.