How does Heat Death work? So universe continues expanding bla

No you retard, death of the universe means -EVERYTHING- is gone.

I believe heat death is after all the protons decay, so no atoms left.

>>8892710
>If so, how does this occur?

>>8892710
Not it doesn't. It means thermodynamic equilibrium is essentially reached and there's not enough free energy for information processing (of which life is a sort). The physical components of the universe don't cease to exist.

>>8892706
Imagine a block of cheese, with little bubbles inside expanding. One of those little bubbles is our entire universe. Imagine it expanding in slow motion, with colder and hotter areas. Some more dense than others. Those are our Galaxies.

At the end, all that will be left of the universe is a big hole, like the one of a gruyere cheese. It's expanding right now.

The timescale is just impossible for us to comprehend, imagine this process taking billions of years instead of miliseconds.

But at the end the atoms themselves will be torn apart and our universe will be one big empty nothing.

>>8892732
Though they will still eventually decay.

Is there a way to cheat the heat death?

>>8892802
Universal warming

>>8892706
It's when you choose negative coefficients for the heat equation and the heat grows exponentially in time.

>>8892706
It means there is no more potential energy for you to do work.

Typing your post required you to do work, and some of that energy is gone now because it radiated away as heat. Eventually that will happen so much an event like you typing can no longer happen, maybe. Nobody knows nor is it relevant to the modern world whatsoever, even academically.

If the expansion of the universe is accelerating, then eventually it will be expanding so fast that everything will be torn apart.

>>8892865
The universe would never expand so that things right next to each other separate from each other.

>>8892865
That is "The Big Rip" theory, in heat death, the gravity of the black dwarves and black holes swallow the mass or the mass is left floating in space forever
>foreveralone.jpg

Why don't we just steal energy from somewhere else?

>>8892882
Even if we just assume he would siphon energy from somewhere like a gas pump, where would we siphon it from?

>>8892714
so why do protons decay? i thought they where stable

>>8892884
Neighboring universe if it exists

>>8892706
Because of quantum tunneling effects, everything, in a veeeeeeeery long time, will transform into iron, without the need for fusion/fission. So basically every atom in the universe will become an iron atom. But again, the time for everything to transform into iron, through fucking quantum tunneling, is so long, that it could practically be considered infinite.

And after that, maybe proton decay will happen, although that is highly speculative, since there is no experimental data to suggest that proton can actually decay. Maybe they can, maybe not, or maybe the decay rate is just stupidly slow.

>>8892898
stable is a relative term.
everything that isn't fundamental has a half-life, it's just that proton half lives are like 10^30 years or something.

I've been reading this and none of it seems to follow any coherent sense. Someone please explain to me how the heat death is supposed to work and what laws it clearly breaks as it is going through this process.

>>8892943
Do you remember the basic laws of thermodynamics?

Right now, to move your eyes and read this you are doing work. That work is not 100% efficient. If it was, we would have perpetual energy machines that just reuse their exhaust as fuel. You are going to lose some energy as radiation. We just call that radiation heat.

Eventually everything in the universe would have done so much work that the system has reached thermodynamic equilibrium, that is there is no longer any work left to be done. If work requires energy, and every time you do work you lose some energy as radiation, eventually all the energy available to turn into radiation will be heat, and this process is not reversible, so nothing will ever happen in the universe again. (This is probably not true because it makes a bunch of assumptions, but that is the basic idea. It derives from the simple laws of thermodynamics.)

>>8892882
"We should take Bikini Bottom and push it somewhere else!"

>>8892737
But I just don't understand how exactly do the atoms decay?

Suppose we're able to be outside the physical realm and just observe a rogue rocky planet, like developer mode in a video game or something where we're unaffected by the inner workings of it but can still see it regardless of light somehow.

If we use the devtool to speed up the timeframe to heat death periods, how exactly would this look? Would the rocky planet start to break up as entropy increases, and eventually just kind of weather away like that more and more until nothing is left?

>>8892872
If the attraction forces are high, but constant, then any accelerating expansion would eventually tear everything apart.

>>8892965
If the expansion forces were ever to expand so fast that your scenario were to happen, there would be an amount of energy in the Universe right now that would make us all die from the Universe collapsing in on itself.

You cannot expand for free, and any space occupied by stuff has energy, and that energy wants to stay together, and the force of expansion to tear that apart would have to be very, very, very powerful, and that expansion energy cannot come from nowhere.

>>8892898
Would this be possible?
Not talking about many world interpretation, but could there be another universe?

>>8892746
>>8892898

In theory yes.

Proton decay is hard to confirm since even in theory it would take longer than the expected lifespan of the universe (as in 10^31 years from now) to do it. And then there would be more energy to get redistributed. It's so long that we currently just operate on the idea that protons are forever while looking to see if they aren't.

>>8893240
Possibly, but it's hard to test that hypothesis.