Wrong answer. I never said you were wrong, I only said no one is right, and that ultimately no one knows. I also challenged that the info I got from the documentary was worth more than anything you could say. Unfortunately your credibility is zero, History channel is above zero. *shrugs*
You rejected my statement, which is more or less saying I am wrong. Of course no ones knows with 100% certainty. That is what science is based on. Science is never proven, it can only fail to be disproved. Do not confuse physics with philosophy, I said earlier. Physics deals with reality and what we can derive from it. It is based on solid physical derivation, often fitted by experimental data. Saying 'how do you/we even know' etc. is a slap in the face to every scientist in the world. Take it up with a philosopher if you want to have that debate.
I stated I was a physicist for the very reason you just mentioned, because I knew you were seeking credibility (and rightfully so), not to 'flex my epeen'.
Or what gets annoying are physicists that can't comprehend what they're reading on the forum. I didn't misinterpret anything, and I didn't preach anything.
Yes, you did. IE, 'The Big Rip':
You conceived it as a literal ripping of the fabric of spacetime. It is not in any means a literal rip (or tear, as you put it). It is, however, exactly what I described in my first post. The universe is expanding so fast that it will eventually reach a rate of expansion in which particles can no longer interact over 'long' ranges (meaning molecules will no longer exist due to there weak intermolecular forces of attraction -- that said, atoms will still remain intact due to the strong force interaction of quarks). The only time you can consider spacetime 'ripping' in some fashion is at singularity points, aka blackholes. Even then, it doesn't really 'rip'.
But eventually heat has to transform into another form of energy when it has exhausted it's source. How does heat energy stay constant? Wouldn't heat energy eventually transform into dark energy or some sort?
I never answered this earlier. Briefly: no.
Heat death is the causation of the fundamental laws of thermodynamics. Every physical process increases the universes entropy by some amount. Eventually, after billions upon billions of years, entropy will have increased enough such that the entire universe is close the absolute zero (meaning all of the hot areas have transfered to cool areas in an absolute way). When there is no difference in heat, heat can no longer be transfered between objects. This disallows any physical process to occur since it requires work, and work requires heat flow. Hence, it is the heat death of the universe (even though it really occurs when the universe is at ~0 Kelvin, a little misleading).
You are right in that the Big Freeze is a valid theory. However, what you described after mentioning the big freeze was in fact the heat death theory. The Big Freeze is nothing more than an effect of the 'rip' theory. In essence, it is the same theory, but specialized to tell how the expansion of the universe will effect normal matter. You started off right
they say that since the Universe is still expanding, it's pulling everything apart, and they predict a moment in time in the very far future called "The Great Freeze"
but ended that sentence in describing heat death:
eventually burn out and space will be pitch black
I should have been more clear, but I was at work eating lunch.
Please note that I am not discrediting the show nor the people involved with the show. I am discrediting your fundamental understanding of what the show was conveying. Do not confuse the two.
Again, I was not trying to be a pretentious prick. I was trying to help you understand what the theories really are saying. Hope I was clear in doing so.
