Talk:Ultimate fate of the universe

The Big Slurp is NOT an option for the end of the universe
False vacuum decay (Big Slurp) is not an option for the end of the universe. Even if the Big Slurp starts somewhere in the universe now, only a portion of universe will be destroyed while most of the universe would still be safe because galaxies 4,200 megaparsecs (13,698,567,863 light-years) away from each other will see each other moving away faster than the speed of light while the Big Slurp cannot expand faster than the speed of light.

So the Big Slurp is a Universe Destroyer instead of a Universe Terminator. It will hurt our universe badly, but cannot kill it completely.

See this YouTube video by Kurzgesagt for details: http://youtube.com/watch?v=ijFm6DxNVyI

2001:8003:9008:1301:91FF:190E:A800:1B4D (talk) 00:46, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

"Death of everything" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Death of everything and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. MB 03:11, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Birth versus death of the Universe.
Should it be any biased here?

The purgatory could be for humans when that of death, but not any Universe for its birth.

Only that it is Event driven when still time only for a flow.

Here it never becomes a single connection for that of relationship. Feilretter2468 (talk) 00:32, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

General relativity
Can somebody explain this to me? Surely the Big Bang + Newtonian gravity are sufficient to consider the ultimate fate of the universe, right? Can anybody provide a citation? –CWenger ( ^ •  @ ) 03:31, 17 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Newtonian gravity isn't sufficient, obviously, since it was proven insufficient by the theory of general relativity. The Big Bang isn't a complete theoretical explanation, and even then modern formulations use general relativity. Newtonian theory is an effective theory which is effective for what it's meant to describe, like an apple falling out of a tree. Newtonian theory is replaced by general relativity in the scale of cosmology. I fail to see a need for a citation on this, are you asking me to teach you physics? 98.109.137.129 (talk) 11:12, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Age - 13.8 vs. 27.4 BY
I've had second thoughts about this insertion I made recently and have backed it out. Firstly, it had WP:RECENTISM problems. Secondly, if presented, this info needs more attention to WP:DUE than I gave it and time needs to be allowed for alternative viewpoints to appear. Thirdly, this is more directly relevant to the topics of other articles (e.g., Age of the universe). If covered in such articles, perhaps mentions should appear here, with wikilinks to relevant sections in such articles. See this long YouTube video, this short WP article and this source cited there. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:59, 12 April 2024 (UTC)