See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/334194778

The Fate of Our Universe: How This Universe Will End

Article · May 2019

CITATIONS READS

0 3,480

8 authors, including:

Pranab Kumar Bhattacharya MD

Calcutta School of Tropical Medicine
22 PUBLICATIONS   90 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

astrophysics View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Pranab Kumar Bhattacharya MD on 03 July 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Research & Reviews: Journal of Space Science & Technology
ISSN: 2321-2837 (Online), ISSN: 2321-6506 (Print)
Volume 8, Issue 1
www.stmjournals.com

The Fate of Our Universe: How This Universe Will End

Rupak Bhattacharya1, Pranab Kumar Bhattacharya2, Upasana Bhattacharya3,
Ritwik Bhattacharya4, Rupsa Bhattacharya5, Ayshi Mukherjee5, Dalia Mukherjee6,
Hindole Banerjee7
1
BSc (Calcutta University), M.Sc (Jadavpur University), Kolkata 110, West Bengal, India
2
MBBS (Calcutta Univ.) Honours ,MD (Calcutta University), FIC Path (India), Now Professor of
Pathology (on Deputation), Calcutta School of Tropical Medicine, Kolkata, West Bengal, India; also,
Professor in Department of Pathology at Murshidabad District Medical College, Berhampore station
Road, Murshidabad, West Bengal, India
3
Student, Kolkata-110, WestBengal, India
4
B.com (Calcutta University), Kolkata, West Bengal, India
5
Student, Calcutta University, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
6
B.A. Honours, Teacher, Calcutta University, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
7
BA Honours (West Bengal State University), West Bengal, India

Abstract
There are two ultimate questions for human beings: “where do we come from?” and “where
are we going?”. For a long time, they have been topics of just religion and philosophy. But in
the last three decades, along with the rapid development of modern cosmology, scientists have
already obtained some important clues to these two questions. To explain the origin of the
Universe, cosmologists have established a standard theoretical framework: Inflation + Hot
Big Bang. To foresee the destiny of the Universe, people have realized that the key point is to
understand the nature; Shape of the Universe, Cosmological constant, Age of the Universe,
How the first star formed, What was the particles nature at Big Bang, About Dark matter and
finally Dark energy and Higgs Particles.

Keywords: Big Bang, cosmological constant, dark matter, Higgs particles, Universe

*Author for Correspondence E-mail: profpkb@yahoo.co.in

AGE OF UNIVERSE AND HUBBLE Friedman- the le-maitre model was

CONSTANT
The universe started at 20x1010 (20,0000
million years ) ago but there is still uncertainty
about the age of the Universe according to
these present authors. Determination of
hydrogen molecule suggests that H~50Km/s-
1
MPC-10H-1=20x109 years, while age-old
galactic clusters like NGC is 10x109 years and
the age of elements obtained from the active
isotopes were ~13x109 years. The Freidman
and Le -maitre models of Universe tell us that
the Universe, however,, has a finite age and it
must be either expanding or contracting, or
both expanding and then contracting again and
so on[1–3]. The observation that galaxies are
in redshift having special features of shifted to
redder wavelength in an apparent Doppler
recession, strongly support however the
expanding Universe model. Confidence in the
strengthening further when Edwin Hubble
discovered the near relation between redshift
and distances in galaxies in 1929.
HUBBLE COSMOLOGICAL
CONSTANT- AND AGE OF THE
UNIVERSE
Hubble discovered a cosmological constant
and this constant is proportionally is known
widely as Hubble constant. The H(0) is usually
expressed in terms of Kilometers per second
per mega Per sec i.e. 50 Km/s/MPC Hubble
constant. The Hubble parameter is defined as
H(t) = 1/R(t)xdR(t)/dt, where R(t) is the scale
factor of the Universe. Hubble constant is the
current value of that parameter and defined as
H0 = H(now) = velocity/distance and is estimated
by measuring the velocity and distance of
extragalactic objects [4-6]. Hubble constant is

RRJoSST (2019) 15-27 © STM Journals 2019. All Rights Reserved Page 15
The Fate of Our Universe
Fig. 1: Picture of Virgo Clusters of the Galaxy
taken by Rupak Bhattacharya.
perhaps the most important parameter in
cosmology because it not only provides us the
physical scale of the Universe which affects
the observed absolute size, dynamical mass
and luminosity of extragalactic objects but it
also provides us an estimated age of the
universe. The Hubble constant has the units of
inverse time. An estimate of the age of the
Universe is the Hubble time 1/H0. This is the
approximate age of a nearly empty universe
one, where expansion had not significantly
been solved by its mass-energy content. A new
Model called Ω=1 model, where Ω is the ratio
of the universe mass-energy density to the
critical value required for binding. In the
Friedman- Le maitre models the expansion
rate of the universe approaches 0 as time
approaches£ and the current age of the
universe is then(2/3) H0-1 is then Age=1/H0[(1-
2q0)-1-q0(1-2q0)-3/2 cos h-1(1/q0-1)] where the
de-acceleration parameter q0 is (1/2)Ω the ratio
of the universe mean mass density to the
closer density[1,7,8].
The age of the universe, when H0 is of 50KmS-
1
MPC-1 gives an age of near 20 billion years
while an H0 of 10050KmS-1MPC-1 in an empty
universe roughly correspond to an age of 13
billion years. But the Cepheid variables are the
bright stars where brightness varies
periodically on time scale between one and a
hundred days. The period of Cepheid is very
tightly correlated with its brightness. So they
are the excellent indicators of distances of
expanding the universe and also the age of the
universe. Cephids are most distant galaxies of
RRJoSST (2019) 15-27 © STM Journals 2019. All Rights Reserved
Bhattacharya et al
the observable universe and are figured
prominently in the extragalactic distance scale.
Cepheid first gave us the idea that other
galaxies lay outside our Milky Way galaxy.
Virgo cephid or Virgo galaxy clusters are so
far farthest, twice as far as the most distant
previously measured cephids. They are now
measured by Hubble Space Telescope (HST).
A new example of Virgo cephid H0=87± 7
Kms-1MPC-1. The galaxy there NGC 4571 is in
the core of Virgo clusters galaxy (Figure 1).
Again Taking H0 as H0=87± 7 Kms-1MPC-1 as
short value (H0 = 80-100 Kms-1MPC-1) and
long value H0 = 50 Kms-1MPC-1) will after the
age of the universe for 20 billion years to
11.2±0.9 billion years and 7.3±billions years
for Ω=0 model and Ω=1 model respectively.
The absence of accelerating force for the age
of the universe is less than 1/H0 and in
standard Big Bang, Model is 2/3x1/H0 0r
7x109 years. In contrast, some stars are thought
to be 8x109 years old, So here starts the crisis
regarding the age of the universe what these
authors strongly feels. In Freidman Universe
model, Freidman et al calculated Ho=80+17
Kms-1MPC-1 implying the age of the universe
9x109 years. In that case, this is identifying 20
Cepheid variables in m 100 a beautiful spiral
galaxy in Virgo. However, if we are ready to
accept the theory that age of the universe is
estimated from the cosmological model based
on Hubble constant, as per this model the age
of the universe will be 13.7±0.2GYR ie 13.7
billion years old.
BIG BANG MULTIPLE BUBBLES
FORMATION AND INFLATION
Though a big bang like event happened in the
early universe, universe spent a period of time
in the early phase (1s Planck’s time) in a
supercooled stage (About 400,000 years after
the Big Bang, that the cosmos had cooled
sufficiently for protons and electrons to
recombine into atoms). In the supercooled
stage, its density (3K) was then dominated by
large positive constant vacuum energy and
false vacuum. The supercooled stage was then
followed by the appearance of multiple
bubbles inflation. The temperature variation
occurred in 3K cosmological background
imprinted some 10~35 second in pre-
inflationary stage and grand unified theory
Page 16
Research & Reviews: Journal of Space Science & Technology
Volume 8, Issue 1
ISSN: 2321-2837 (Online), ISSN: 2321-6506 (Print)
[GUT] happened there with the generation of
trillions and trillions of degrees of
temperature. As per the old inflationary theory
of Big Bang, there appeared multiple bubbles
of true vacuum and inflation blew up a small
casually connected region of the universe that
was something much like the observable
universe of today. This actually preceded large
scale cosmological homogeneity & was
reduced to an exponentially small number the
present density of any magnetic monopoles,
that according to many of particle physicist
GUT & would have been produced in the pre-
inflationary phase. In the old inflationary
theory, our universe must be homogeneous in
all its direction and was no doubt isotropic. In
old inflation theory, the supercooled stage was
married by the appearance of bubbles of the
true vacuum, the broken symmetry of ground
state. The model of old inflation theory,
however, was later on abandoned, because the
exponential expansion of any supercooled
state always presents the bubbles from
merging and complicate the phase transition.
Moreover in a true sense, the universe is not
totally homogenous but in small scale non
homogenous too.
It is very much a well-known fact that the
universe contains a critical density of matter
(3K) and infinite space-time. The matters are
mostly baryonic and Mixed Dark matter
[MDM]. Through COBE satellite studies, we
know that the early universe consisted of a
mixture of Cold Dark matter and hot Dark
Matter, which is known altogether as Mixed
Dark Matter [MDM]. Most Redshift surveys
had been either shallow (Z=<0.03), three-
dimensional survey of few thousands of
galaxies covering a large angle or somewhat
deeper (Z>0.05). So argument still persists
about the mechanism by which galaxies/first
generation stars were formed in the early
universe. The essence of the problem is so
high-level physics that while galaxies were on
average, uniformly distributed throughout the
volume of the universe, as it should be in the
Inflationary “ Big Bang” model, the observed
distribution of both optically visible and radio
galaxies on the sky was not uniform. But very
much patchy (Authors Prof. Pranab Kumar
Bhattacharya’s Concept only). Does this
RRJoSST (2019) 15-27 © STM Journals 2019. All Rights Reserved
clumsiness’ represent that the distribution of
matter at some primeval stage in the evolution
of the universe or there had been some kind of
gravitational process [3,9,10]?suggested that
the present distributions of galaxies are in the
relic of a dynamic process, in which an
outward propagating shock wave created an
earlier generation of galaxies. Created galaxies
at some places were of high density on the
shock front. But the problem of their theory to
present authors are that the empirical rule,
which says that the chance finding of a second
galaxy within same value unit at a distance of
“S” is proportional to an inverse power of “S”,
which simply means that there is a greater
chance that galaxies will be close together than
it is far apart. Secondly, the distribution of
galaxies in the Universe may have a fractal
three-dimensional structure. The most
spectacular of large voids in three dimensions
of galaxies is the BOTES VOID. A region at
least 50 MPS in diameter that contain no
luminous galaxies. Why voids? A survey of
large-scale galaxies distributions reveals that
the “Large Voids” were not the exception, but
the rule. The survey was the systemic
collection of Red Shifts of all galaxies of
apparent magnitude brightness than 15.5 in a
region measuring 6 degrees by 12 degrees on
the sky. These Red Shifts via “Hubble laws”
provides us a three-dimensional map of the
galaxy distribution in a limited volume of the
universe. Inspection of the map of the galaxy
revealed a striking result- large apparently
empty, quasi spherical “Voids” dominate
space & time and galaxies are crammed into
the thin shits and ridges in between hole.
(Joseph Sick- Nature-Vol.320; P12; 1986)
Joseph Sick discussed in his article published
in Nature (Vol 320; p12; 1986) that galaxies
were distributed in a thin slice of the universe
to 150 MPC. The redshift measurement of
galaxies, however, reveals a foamy and
clustered distribution of galaxies in the
Universe. Most of them lying on a sheet,
surrounding large, almost empty holes up to
50 MPC According to Jeremiath Ostriker &
Lennoy Cowie (1981), an explosion initiated
by many supernovas in a newly formed galaxy
drive a blast wave, which propagated outward
and swept up a spherical shell of ambient gas.
A hole was thus evacuated and the unstable
Page 17
The Fate of Our Universe
compressed shell fragmented to form more
galaxies. These, in turn, developed blast waves
and a series of bubbles developed that filled
most of the spaces with galaxies (Jeremiah
Ostriker & Lennoy Cowie - Astrophysics
journal letter Vol 243; P127; 1981) and
published independently by Satron Ikeuchi-
Astronomical Society of Japan Vol, 33; P211;
1981) But the problem of this hypothesis to
present authors are - 1) possibility of the
mechanism itself - Supernova exploded and
cleared out holes that are tens or in rare cases
hundreds of parsec cross? 2) did this
phenomenon really worked out on the scale of
MPC? 3) Billions of supernovae were
presumed to be exploded coherently over the
crossing time of galaxy of about 108 years to
yield a vast explosion 4) Next is the missing
ingredients which are Gravity. Density
fluctuations were present at the beginning of
the time in the earliest instants of the” Big
Bang gospel” and the gravity amplified the
fluctuation into the large-scale structure of the
universe. Most cosmologists& theoretical
physicists believe today that galaxies were
originated in this manner rather than by
explosive amplification of primordial seeds
which themselves must be attributed into the
initial condition.
LARGE VOIDS AND DARK MATTER
A “giant hole” in the universe was discovered
by astronomers from Minnesota in 2009
January. Investigating an area of the sky
known as the WMAP cold Spot, Lawrence
Rudnick and colleagues found a void empty of
stars, gas and even dark matter. As AP’s
widely circulating report notes, the hole is big:
an “expanse of nearly 6 billion trillion miles of
emptiness” Astronomers have long known that
there are big voids in the universe, and think
they can explain them with their theories as to
how large scale structures first formed [ Daniel
Cressey” Plenty of nothing - August 24,
2007The Great Beyond Nature.Com
http://blogs.nature.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/3329].
our Galaxy, the Milky Way, contains also
disks of ‘dark matter. Dark’ matter is always
invisible but its presence can be inferred
through its gravitational influence on its
surroundings. Dark matter particles are neutral
it does not couple directly to the
RRJoSST (2019) 15-27 © STM Journals 2019. All Rights Reserved
Bhattacharya et al
electromagnetic field, and hence annihilations
straight into two monochromatic photons (or a
photon and a Z boson) are typically strongly
suppressed. γ-rays can be a significant by-
product of dark matter annihilations, since
they can arise either from the decay of neutral
pions produced in the hadronization of the
annihilation products or through internal
bremsstrahlung associated into charged
particles, with annihilations into charged
particles, interactions of energetic leptons. In
the Lattanzi & Silk models the annihilation
results in two neutral Z bosons or a pair of W+
and W. bosons, and the dominant source of γ-
rays is neutral pion decay. Form_ = 4.5 TeV,
every annihilation results in 26 photons with
energies between 3 and 300GeV.
Physicists today believe that dark matter
makes up 22% of the mass of the Universe
(compared with the 4% of normal matter and
74% comprising the mysterious ‘dark
energy’). But, despite its pervasive influence,
even today no-one is sure what dark matter
consists of. It was thought that dark matter
forms in roughly spherical lumps called
‘halos’, one of which envelopes the Milky
Way and other spiral galaxies. Stars and gas
are thought to have settled into disks very
early on in the life of the Universe and this
affected how smaller dark matter halos
formed. Such a theory suggests that most
lumps of dark matter in our locality actually
merged to form a halo around the Milky Way.
But the largest lumps were preferentially
dragged towards the galactic disk and were
then torn apart, creating a disk of dark matter
within the Galaxy. The presence of unseen
haloes of Dark matter had long been inferred
from the high rotation speed of Gas and stars
in the outer part of spiral galaxies. The volume
of the density of these dark matter decreases
less quickly from the galactic center than doe’s
heat luminous mass such as that in stars
meaning that dark matter dominates the mass
from the center of galaxies. A spiral galaxy is
composed of a thin disk of young stars called
(population I star) whose local surface
brightness falls exponentially with cylindrical
distances from the galactic center and with
height above the galactic plane.
Page 18
Research & Reviews: Journal of Space Science & Technology
Volume 8, Issue 1
ISSN: 2321-2837 (Online), ISSN: 2321-6506 (Print)
The concept of biasing the formation of large
scale structure of the universe was first
introduced by Nick Kaisar in the journal of
Astrophysics (Peacock .JA &Heavens A.F-
Monday Nottingham. Royal Astronomical
Society Vol 217; P805; 1985 &BardenJ. Bond.
Jr, Kaiser. N. Eszalay –Journal of
Astrophysics). Galaxies were presumed only
to form in the rare peaks of an initial Gaussian
distribution of density fluctuation. The average
density of the universe is roughly 1031gcm-3
which is less than 10% of critical Density (K)
of the present universe [The matter of which
universe is made of 42.3% is CDM matter and
73% is dark energy]. Density fluctuation peaks
that occurred in a potential large-scale cluster
acquired with the slight boost that enabled
galaxies to form. The biasing hypothesis
enhanced the large-scale structure that
developed as gravitational forces amplified the
initial fluctuations. Biasing hypothesis enabled
stimulation of a universe containing “Cold
Dark Matter” at the critical density, with the
observational determination of density
perturbation of the universe. Density
Fluctuation was present at the beginning of
Time in the earliest instants of the Big Bang
and the Gravity amplified the fluctuations into
the large-scale structure of our universe. The
“Voids” were not really voids but contained
matter that had somehow failed to become
luminous. The Dark matter was more
uniformly distributed than the luminous matter
and does not respond to most of the
astronomical tests. The universe is now
populated with the non-luminous component
of matter (Dark Matter) made of weakly
interacting massive particles which does
cluster in galactic scale and designated
ΩDM≈0.15-0.35. The dark matter was weakly
interacting and was clustered in all scale
(hence labeled as cold). It selectively formed
galaxies at an early epoch in the rare density
peaks. The Cosmic Background Explorer
study announced on 18th Nov’1990 that COBE
had used its liquid helium cooled detectors to
make a stunningly accurate measurement of
BIG Bang afterglow .The COBE study was
based on microwave background radiation that
bathes every object in the universe with a cool
wash of photon 2.7K. COBE study conferred
RRJoSST (2019) 15-27 © STM Journals 2019. All Rights Reserved
that the Big Bang was a remarkably smooth
and homogeneous event. The COBE study
consistently pegged its temperature at about
2.7 K_ what was predicted by Standard Big
Bang Model which holds that radiation was
emitted by cosmic fireball just a few hundred
years after the Big Bang moment itself and
cooling off ever since then. George Smoot
[2006 Nobel Laureate in Physics] and his
colleagues of Barkley university used
differential microwave radiometer to look for
anisotropic variations in the brightness of
radiation from point to point of the sky. They
presumably corresponded to density variation
in the cosmic plasma shortly after the Big
Bang and these variables are in turn
presumably the clumps of matter that
contracted by GRAVITY to form the galaxies.
The problem was that anisotropies if they
existed at all, were so weak that it was hard to
see now that how they had contracted into
much of galaxies. Any clump that was going
to form a galaxy needs to be heavy enough to
fight cosmic expansion which tends to pull the
material apart almost as fast as gravity can pull
it together. COBE showed no anisotropy at all
to an accuracy of one part in 104to one part 105
and it was DARK MATTER. This Dark matter
(Figure 2) consisted of some kind of massive
but weakly interacting elementary particles
produced in the Big Bang. The cosmic
background explorer study (COBE) satellite
study was undertaken by the leadership of
George Smoot considers the Big Bang very
seriously. Microwave Background Study also
provided BIG Bang COBE study had spotted
millionth of degree variations in the
temperature of microwave left over from Big
Bang traces of the early universe. Images of
the cosmic microwave background, the
radiation left over from the Big Bang; provide
the earliest snapshots of the cosmos-from
when it was only about 400,000 years old
only. The model of MDM of the universe is
consistent with homogeneous inflation theory
and large-scale density fluctuation and
galaxies distribution that happened in the early
universe. It was the Merry Gelman, who first
described the nature of the earliest particles in
the universe. According to him “it was quark
particles in quantum theories.” Actually speaking,
Page 19
The Fate of Our Universe
Fig. 2: How much is the Matter of the
Universe Dark Energy constitutes 71%, Dark
Matter 24% and Normal Matter is 5%.
the quest for the early Universe had provided
the particle physicists with an unrivaled
accelerator of high-energy particles. The
Grand Unification Theory (GUT) based on
‘Gauge Symmetry” say that Proton (Nucleon)
should decay with a half-life of at most 1031
Years. But while isolating the rarest events
due to spontaneous decaying of protons,
extensive shielding from atmospheric “Muon”
produced by cosmic rays showers was also
regarded and the primary result once was
reported at Geneva, Switzerland. This
experiment was carried out us provided in
deep underground Kolar Goldfield, Kamoka.
This experiment provided us the most
sensitive limit so far, that the half-life of the
proton is 1.5x 1032 years. This half-life of a
proton is close to the age of the elements
obtained from Radioactive isotopes ~10X109
years.This experiments had great implications
to astrophysicists in that 1) possible
explanation of the ratio of proton to the photon
in the universe. Since the photons now are
seen in 3K-background radiation are the
remnants of equal numbers of particles and
antiparticles created during the thermal
RRJoSST (2019) 15-27 © STM Journals 2019. All Rights Reserved
Bhattacharya et al
equilibrium of first instants of the Universe.
This particle was Merry Gelman’s quark
particles and its antiparticles were antiquarks.
Today’s observed proton [matter] represents
an excess of matter after antimatter. This is the
asymmetry in the Universe. This asymmetry
probably had arisen naturally after 10-35
seconds of initial Big bang. However, Madsen
and Mark Tailor gave the concept of another
particle in the primordial universe. The name
of their particles is “Neutrinos”. There are
broadly three species of ‘Neutrinos”. 1)
Electron neutrinos 2) Muon neutrinos and 3)
that neutrinos. To start the universe i.e. before
nucleosynthesis, neutrinos must have a zero
rest mass, which can support at least a
hypothesis and theories of the large-scale
structure of the universe. According to Maiden
and Tailor, the Dark Matter of which this
universe consisted of were the neutrinos and
not the quarks.
How did the cosmic Dark Age end and
when did the first star lit up in the universe
in a few hundred million years after the Big
Bang?
According to the Standard Model of Big Bang
Star formation in the early universe was very
different from the present now. Star today
form in the giant clouds of molecular gas and
dust embedded in the disk of large galaxies
like our milky ways. Whereas the first stars
evolved inside “Mini holes” agglomerates of
primordial gas and dark matter with a total
mass of millions of times of our Sun. Another
difference arises for the initial absences of
elements, other than hydrogen and helium that
were synthesized in the Big Bang. Gas clouds
today be efficient via radiation emitted by
atoms molecule or dust grains that contain
heavy elements. Because the primordial gas
lacked those coolants, it remained
comparatively hot. For gravity, to overcome
when the higher thermal pressure, the mass of
all first stars must have been larger as well.
The emergence of first stars fundamentally
changed the early universe at the end of the
cosmic dark ages. Owing to the high masses
these stars were copious. They also produced
many ultraviolet photons that were energetic
enough to ionize hydrogen, the most abundant
element in the universe. Thus began the
extended process” re-Ionization” which
Page 20
Research & Reviews: Journal of Space Science & Technology
Volume 8, Issue 1
ISSN: 2321-2837 (Online), ISSN: 2321-6506 (Print)
transformed the universe from the completely
cooled and dark material state into the fully
ionized medium. Observation of CMB is due
to the scattering of CMB photons of free
electrons, phase constraints in the onset of re-
ionization. How the first stars formed and how
they affected the evolution of cosmos assumes
that dark matter is made up of WIMP-yet
undetected because they interact with normal
matter only via gravity and weak nuclear
interactions. A possible WIMP candidate is the
Neutrions particles, the lightest superpartner in
mass supersymmetry theory but not zero rest
mass particles [1]. Supersymmetry postulated
that for every known particle there must be a
superpartner thus effectively doubling the
mass of the elementary particles. Most of the
superparticles that were produced after the Big
Bang were unstable and decayed. The
neutrinos are expected to be rather massive
having roughly the mass of hundreds of
protons, so are a part of cosmos. Most of the
matter in the universe did not interact then
with light except gravitationally. These dark
matters assumed to be very intensively cold,
that is its velocity dispersion was sufficiently
small for density perturbation imprinted in the
early universe to persist in a very small scale.
Dark matter has yet to be detected in the
human laboratories. However, there might
exist some viable dark matter candidates from
particle physics that were not cold. They may
be termed as Warm Dark Matter (WDM) as
per present authors. Warm dark matter
particles had intensive thermal velocities and
their motion quenches the growth of structure
below a “free streaming scale” {the distances
over which a typical WDM particles travel},
which depend on the nature of the particle
because small and dark haloes do not form
better than free streaming scale. The dark
matter haloes that formed the galaxies in a
WDM model had far fewer substructures and
were less concentrated as compared to the cold
dark matter (CDM) counterparts. The first
generation of stars in the universe formed
when primordial gas compressed by falling
into these small dark matter potential wells.
Large scale partner in the spectrum of density
perturbation causes progenitors of present-day
clusters of galaxies to be among the first
objects to condense out of the initially almost
smooth mass distribution.
RRJoSST (2019) 15-27 © STM Journals 2019. All Rights Reserved
Lang Gao & Tom Thennus [science 317:14th
Sept: Page1527:2007] studied the early star
formation in the redshift Z=0 and they
concluded that pristine gas heat and it falls
into the dark matter potential Well (halos)
cools radiatively because of formation of
molecular hydrogen and became self-
gravitating. They told another important
particle called Gravitinos_ a popular WDM
candidate particle with mass MWDM=3Kev-a. a
free streaming particle of few +_ evs of
kelopersec and first stars at redshift Z~200 and
the growth structure re-simulation in the led to
a pattern of filaments and sheets which is
familiar from the local large scale distribution
of Galaxies. In assumed Gaussian spectrum of
density perturbation appropriate for an
inflationary model lead collapse along with one
(sheet) and two (filaments) direction before the
formation of Haloes. Altogether the large scale
filamentary pattern is very similar in CDM
&WDM. This structure of filaments themselves
was very different. The CDM filaments
fragmented later into numerous nearly spherical
high-density regions(haloes) and WDM
filaments fragmented at redshift Z=23.34 when
the universe was 140 million years old. Gas and
Dark matter accreted perpendicular and to the
filament axis. Dark matter particles falling into
filaments performed damped oscillations as the
potential well deepened. Baryons did not
undergo orbit but gas compressed to a
temperature T~7000K at γ~ 20Pc. Rapid build-
up of H2 induced cooling and gas started to
dominate the density.
EARLY STAR FORMATION
We generally think of stars in populations.
Population III stars were so long the
hypothetical first stars in cosmos. These stars
are extremely metal-poor but massive stars
composed of only gases as told. By metals we
authors talking about elements heavier than
hydrogen (and helium depending on which
definition you read and is what we consider to
be a non-metal too). All elements heavier than
hydrogen are a by-product or ash from fusion
within the cores of stars. Population II stars
group however have also very little metals,
and stars in globular clusters are made up of a
good percentage of such population II stars.
Population II stars are till date considered to
have created all other elements found in the
Page 21
The Fate of Our Universe
periodic table beyond hydrogen and helium.
Prior to 1978 or 1979, these were the stars
thought to be the oldest stars and still are the
oldest observed stars in the observable
cosmos. Population I stars are considered very
metal-rich young stars and they include our
own Sun and are common in the arms of our
galaxy the Milky Way. Many astronomers
have for long theorized existence of first
generation of such stars - known as Population
III stars as stated by me - that was in fact born
out of the primordial materials from the Big
Bang event. All the heavier chemical elements
- such as oxygen, nitrogen, lithium, carbon and
iron, which are essential to creating life —
were then frozen in the bellies of stars. This
means that the first stars must have formed out
of the only elements to exist prior to stars
called Proto-stars: hydrogen, helium and trace
amounts of lithium. These Population III stars
would have been enormous -several hundred
or even a thousand times more massive than
our Sun is - blazing hot, and transient -
exploding as supernovae after only about two
million years. But until now the search for
physical proof of their existence had been
inconclusive. A team in 2015 led by David
Sobral, from the Institute of Astrophysics and
Space Sciences, the Faculty of Sciences of the
University of Lisbon in Portugal, and Leiden
Observatory in the Netherlands, has now used
ESO’s Very Large Telescope (VLT) to peer
back into the ancient Universe, to a period
known as re-ionization, approximately 800
million years after the Big Bang as we told.
Instead of conducting a narrow and deep study
of a small area of the sky, they broadened their
scope to produce the widest survey of very
distant galaxies ever attempted. According to
conventional cosmological theory, all space,
time, and energy began with the Big Bang,
now estimated to have occurred around 13.8
billion years ago. In a new twist to standard
theoretical models, however, many
astrophysicists now believe that the universe
may have suddenly inflated (inflation theory
of Alan Guth) from a tiny point after this
incredible explosion to create dark energy (74
%) and dark matter (22 %), as well as a small
amount (04 %) of ordinary matter we see in
the universe in the form of electrons and
quarks or neutrinos in a superhot plasma (more
on the proportion of matter in the "Cinderella
RRJoSST (2019) 15-27 © STM Journals 2019. All Rights Reserved
Bhattacharya et al
Universe" model from SDSS). Within the first
second after the Big Bang, the quark-gluon
plasma may have cooled enough for quarks to
combine and formed protons (the most
common atomic nuclei of hydrogen) and
neutrons. After about three minutes, a small
portion of the neutrons avoided decay by
bonding with protons (to produce deuterons,
the atomic nuclei of the deuterium form of
hydrogen) which underwent rapid reactions to
form helium and a trace of lithium. For a few
hundred thousand years afterward, however,
the universe still remained extremely hot at
around a billion degrees and so ordinary
matter remained then ionized, as plasma of
positively charged ions and unbound
negatively charged electrons. Three to four
hundred thousand years have then passed
before continuing cosmological expansion and
cooling enabled atomic nuclei to hold onto
electrons and create neutral hydrogen and
helium gas (along with a trace of lithium at
around a redshift of z ~ 1,000). Measurements
of the modern universe suggest that, by mass,
about three-fourths of the ordinary matter
formed from the Big Bang became hydrogen
while virtually all of the rest became helium;
by number, around nine-tenths of all atoms
may still be hydrogen, while roughly 9 % has
become helium. After this initial cooling, the
early universe became extremely dark.
Although cosmic microwave background
radiation from around 380,000 years after the
Big Bang suggest that the early universe was
remarkably smooth, very small-scale density
fluctuations (possibly related to small
variations in early cosmological inflation
predicted by quantum mechanics) may have
led to uneven concentrations in the primordial
distribution of matter in the universe, of which
around nine-tenths may be comprised of dark
matter (CDM). While particles of ordinary
matter readily interact with one another and, if
electrically charged, with electromagnetic
radiation, dark matter is comprised of particles
that do not react with such radiation, although
dark matter interacts gravitationally just like
ordinary matter. In theory, gravitational
attraction should have caused these dark
matter density variations to condense into a
network of filaments and sheets over time.
Unlike ordinary matter, however, the dark
matter hypothesized by theorists either cannot
Page 22
Research & Reviews: Journal of Space Science & Technology
Volume 8, Issue 1
ISSN: 2321-2837 (Online), ISSN: 2321-6506 (Print)
or mostly did not collapse into dense objects
like stars, brown dwarfs, and stellar remnants
(white dwarfs, neutron stars, and black holes)
Although dark matter is thought to be
relatively segregated from ordinary baryonic
matter in outer galactic halos and intergalactic
space today, the two may have been mixed
initially. As the dark matter condensed into a
denser filamentary network, ordinary matter
made of hydrogen and helium gas also was
gravitationally attracted by these relative
concentrations of dark matter, creating
Lyman-alpha "forest" clouds of gas. At the
nodes of the dark matter filaments, these gas
clouds collapsed under gravitation towards of
the cores of denser clumps of 100,000 to one
million Solar-masses that may have measured
around 30 to 100 light-years across and still
consisted mostly of dark matter. As the gas
clouds contracted, compression would have
heated the gas to temperatures above 1,000°
Kelvin (727°C or 1,340°F). Some hydrogen
atoms would have paired up within the dense,
hot gas to create molecular hydrogen, which
would then help to cool the densest parts of the
gas cloud by emitting infrared radiation after
collision with atomic hydrogen. Eventually,
the temperature in the densest regions of such
clouds would drop to around 200 to
300°Kelvin (-73 to 27°C or -100 to 80°F),
reducing the gas pressure and allowing the
cloud to continue contracting into
gravitationally bound clumps The results of
various simulations by several teams of
astronomers suggest that these nearly "metal-
free" clumps were able to resist fragmentation
into smaller clumps. Hence, the first stars
(often they are called Population III stars) may
have been very massive, hot, and bright, with
100 to 1,000 Solar-masses (more discussion on
Jeans mass and metal-free stars. At least one
simulation suggests that only one massive star
may have formed for each proto-galactic
clump because of resistance to renewed
fragmentation of the star-forming cloud and
intense radiation once the star is formed.
Various computer simulations suggest that the
first stars could have appeared between 100
and 250 million years after the Big Bang when
the universe had expanded to at least 1/30 of
its present size. In 2003, astronomers
announced that analyses of NASA's recent
WMAP satellite images of the cosmic
RRJoSST (2019) 15-27 © STM Journals 2019. All Rights Reserved
microwave background indicate that this
primordial light was ionized by the first
generation of stars, which may have come and
gone within only 400 million years after the
Big Bang , but further analysis of data led
astronomers to conclude by March 2006 that
ionization may not have occurred as much as
400 million years after the Big Bang latest
WMAP results). When this first generation of
massive stars lighted up, the so-called "Cosmic
Dark Age" ended. And first light (photon) of
the universe came out. Even then, these stars
were surrounded by a "fog" of light-absorbing
neutral hydrogen. The first stars, however,
began emitting intense ultraviolet radiation --
perhaps as much as a million times that of Sol
- that "re-ionized" neutral hydrogen atoms by
energizing electrons away from their proton
nuclei (Larson and Bromm, Scientific
American, December 2001, in pdf). Gradually,
the first stars created ever-wider bubbles of
clearer space. Since these stars were short-
lived, it probably took another generation of
stars and a few hundred million years for that
hydrogen fog to dissipate, as strong absorption
of ultraviolet light from quasars dating to 860
to 900 million or so years after the Big Bang
suggests that the last patches of neutral
hydrogen were being ionized at that time. On
July 31, 2008, a team of astronomers (led by
Naoki Yoshida) announced that new
simulation results which indicate that the first
stars formed within 300 million years after the
Big Bang. First, "seed" proto-stars formed
from the collapsing core of gas clouds that go
through a stage as a flattened disc, with two
trailing spiral arms of gas. Despite having only
0.1 Solar-mass, the proto-stars quickly "bulked
up" on surrounding gases into behemoths of at
least 100 Solar-masses within 10,000 years.
After a million years as a very bright star,
some of these massive stars may have become
supernovae - depending on their mass On
December 3, 2007, a team of theoretical
physicists (including Katherine Freese,
Douglas Spolyar, and Paolo Gondolo) released
the results of a paper which suggests that the
first proto-stars could have been powered by
the annihilation of opposite forms of dark
matter (Weakly Interacting Massive Particles
or WIMPs, such as neutralinos). In theory,
each dark matter particle should have its own
anti-particle. When such particle pairs meet,
Page 23
The Fate of Our Universe
they would annihilate each other, whereby
one-third of the resulting energy is produced
as neutrinos which escape, one-third becomes
gamma-ray photons, and the last third
becomes electrons and positrons.
MULTIPLE AND MINIKWASI
BUBBLE UNIVERSE AND THE
POSSIBILITY OF COLLISION WITH
ANOTHER BUBBLE
Cosmological phase transitions, inflationary
cosmology, as well as the putative landscape
of string theory, all invoke various aspects of
bubble universe dynamics. In this regard, the
classic works [1, 2] play a key role in
understanding the quantum nucleation of
bubble universes with different scalar field
expectation values. More recently, the works
[3, 4] gave evidence that a distinct classical
process, involving bubble collisions, provides
an alternate - and efficient - the mechanism for
moving from one vacuum to another. Recent
works [3–6] indicate that ultra-relativistic
bubble collisions provide a mechanism for
efficiently moving between vacua. Generally
speaking, an accurate description of the
collision between two bubbles embedded in a
parent false vacuum requires using the full
nonlinear equations of motion. But the ultra-
relativistic limit offers a great simplification,
as the nonlinearities become subdominant [3],
and so the solution is given by superposing
two single bubble solutions. This is the free
passage approximation.
THE DARK ENERGY AND FATE OF
THE UNIVERSE
The fate of the Universe - How the Universe
will End?
Astrophysicists now believe that the ultimate
fate of this Universe depends on three things:
1) The universe’s overall shape, 2) its density,
and 3) How much amount of dark energy the
Universe is truly made of. The first two
scenarios how ever again depend on whether
the universe existing in a “flat” or “open”
“closed” system (one that is negatively curved,
similar to the surface of a saddle). The
evidence that the present bubble of this
Universe began with the Big Bang is very
compelling. 13.8 billion years ago, the entire
Universe was then compressed into a
RRJoSST (2019) 15-27 © STM Journals 2019. All Rights Reserved
Bhattacharya et al
microscopic singularity that grew
exponentially into the vast cosmos we now see
today. But what does the future hold with
humanity and civilization? How will this
bubble Universe end is a big question? Will
this Universe end in another singularity called
“Big Crunch” (Figure 3)or will it expand
endlessly or will it expand for some time
[expansion to last until the current Hubble
time, about 1010 years] & then collapse on
itself [let us allow for the expansion to last
until the current Hubble time, about 1010
years, to accommodate our Universe and then
collapse] will further expand and continues in
that manner or the bubble universe will
coalesce into another growing bubble universe
and transfer its 22% dark matter and 4%
matter and into that new bubble universe?
Theoretical physicists & physicists had been
thus pondering the ultimate fate of this
Universe for thousands of years. In the last
century, cosmologists considered three
outcomes for the end of everything, and it all
depended on the critical density of the
Universe. i) If this critical density was high,
then there was enough mutual gravity to slow
down expansion and eventually halt the
expansion of the universe after 1010
years. Billions of years in the future, it would
then collapse in on itself again, perhaps
creating another Big Bang. This is known as a
closed Universe, and then in that universe, the
final result is the “Big Crunch”. “The Big
Crunch” is thought to be the direct
consequence of the Big Bang. In this model,
the expansion of the universe doesn’t continue
forever. After an undetermined amount of time
(possibly 1010 years), when the average density
Fig. 3: Big Crunch, Continue Forever and Big
Chill.
Page 24
Research & Reviews: Journal of Space Science & Technology
Volume 8, Issue 1
ISSN: 2321-2837 (Online), ISSN: 2321-6506 (Print)
of the universe is enough to stop the
expansion, the universe will begin the process
of collapsing in on itself. Eventually, all of the
matter and particles in existence will be pulled
together into a super dense state (perhaps even
into a black hole-like singularity). If the
critical density becomes low, then there will
not be enough gravity to hold things,all matter
together. The expansion will then continue on
ever and forever. Stars will then die in nova or
supernovas, galaxies will be spread apart, and
everything will cool down to the background
temperature of the Universe. This is an open
Universe, and such end is known as the” Big
Freeze” . In this scenario, the Universe
continues to expand at ever increasing speed.
As this happens the heat will be dispersed
throughout space-time as clusters, galaxies,
stars, planets, Satellites all are put apart. It will
continue to get colder and colder until the
temperature throughout the Universe reaches
absolute zero (or a point at which, the universe
can no longer be exploited to perform work).
Similarly, if the expansion of the Universe
continues, planets, stars and galaxies are
pulled so far apart that the stars would
eventually lose access to raw material needed
for star formation, thus the lights inevitably go
out for good. This is the point at which the
Universe will reach a maximum state of
entropy. Any stars that will remain will
continue to slowly burn away until the last star
is extinguished. Everything will be so far away
that light from distant stars and galaxies will
never reach to earth due to the expansion of
the universe. When the universe density is
equal to critical density the expansion will
continue but the expansion will eventually
start to decrease gradually, finally when the
critical density will become greater than the
universe the expansion will halt and the
Universe will start to collapse back on itself
into another singularity “Big Crunch” and it
will further trigger a next Big Bang. And if
the critical density is just right, the Universe’s
expansion goes on forever, but it’s always
slowing down, reaching a dead stop in an
infinite amount of time. This creates a Flat
Universe… also a Big Freeze. And our
universe is a Flat type Universe fortunately as
shown above and WIMP study by NASA’s
WMPA spacecraft.
RRJoSST (2019) 15-27 © STM Journals 2019. All Rights Reserved
The universe probably has existed forever,
according to a new model that applies
quantum correction terms to complement
Einstein's theory of general relativity. The
model may also account for dark matter and
dark energy, resolving multiple problems at
once. The widely accepted age of the universe,
as estimated by general relativity, is 13.8
billion years. In the beginning, everything in
existence is thought to have occupied a single
infinitely dense point, or singularity. Only
after this point began to expand in a "Big
Bang" did the universe officially begin.
Although the Big Bang singularity arises
directly and unavoidably from the
mathematics of general relativity, some
scientists see it as problematic because the
math can explain only what happened
immediately after - not at or before - the
singularity generally accepted view of our
universe (homogeneous, isotropic, spatially
flat, obeying general relativity, and currently
consisting of about 72% Dark Energy, likely
in the form of a cosmological constant Λ ,
about 23% Dark Matter, and the rest
observable matter) implies its small
acceleration, as inferred from Type IA
supernova observations, CMBR data and
baryon acoustic oscillations. However, quite a
few things remain to be better understood, e.g.
(i) The smallness of Λ, about 10−123 in Planck
units (‘the smallness problem’),
(ii) The approximate equality of vacuum and
matter density in the current epoch (‘the
coincidence problem’),
(iii) The apparent extreme fine-tuning required
in the early universe, to have a spatially
flat universe in the current epoch (‘the
flatness problem’),
(iv) The true nature of dark matter, and
(v) The beginning of our universe, or the so-
called big-bang. QRE, the second order
Friedmann equation derived from the QRE
also contains two quantum correction
terms. These terms are generic and
unavoidable and follow naturally in a
quantum mechanical description of our
universe. Of these, the first can be
interpreted as cosmological constant or
dark energy of the correct (observed)
magnitude and a small mass of the
Page 25
The Fate of Our Universe
graviton (or axion). The second quantum
correction term pushes back the time
singularity indefinitely and predicts an
everlasting universe. While inhomogeneous
or anisotropic perturbations are not
expected to significantly affect these
results, it would be useful to redo the
current study with such small
perturbations to rigorously confirm that
this is indeed the case. Also, as noted in
the introduction, we assume it to follow
general relativity, whereas the Einstein
equations may themselves undergo
quantum corrections, especially at early
epochs, further affecting predictions.
Given the robust set of starting
assumptions, we expect our main results to
continue to hold even if and when a fully
satisfactory theory of quantum gravity is
formulated. For the cosmological constant
problem at late times, on the other hand,
quantum gravity effects are practically
absent and can be safely ignored. We hope
to report on these and related issues
elsewhere. QRE, the second order
Friedmann equation derived from the QRE
also contains two quantum correction
terms. These terms are generic and
unavoidable and follow naturally in a
quantum mechanical description of our
universe. Of these, the first can be
interpreted as cosmological constant or
dark energy of the correct (observed)
magnitude and a small mass of the
graviton (or axion). The second quantum
correction term pushes back the time
singularity indefinitely and predicts an
everlasting universe. While inhomogeneous
or anisotropic perturbations are not
expected to significantly affect these
results, it would be useful to redo the
current study with such small
perturbations to rigorously confirm that
this is indeed the case. Also, as noted in
the introduction, we assume it to follow
general relativity, whereas the Einstein
equations may themselves undergo
quantum corrections, especially at early
epochs, further affecting predictions.
Given the robust set of starting
assumptions, we expect our main results to
continue to hold even if and when a fully
RRJoSST (2019) 15-27 © STM Journals 2019. All Rights Reserved
Bhattacharya et al
satisfactory theory of quantum gravity is
formulated. For the cosmological constant
problem at late times, on the other hand,
quantum gravity effects are practically
absent and can be safely ignored. We hope
to report on these and related issues
elsewhere.
REFERENCES
1. Kohler, Susanna. Supernovae, Dark
Energy, and the Fate of Our Universe.
AAS Nova. April 05, 2019. Accessed May
15, 2019.
https://aasnova.org/2019/04/05/supernova
e-dark-energy-and-the-fate-of-our-
universe/.
2. Cendes, Yvette. Jun 2019. Discover
Magazine. Accessed May 15, 2019.
http://discovermagazine.com/2017/march/
game-over.
3. Trosper, Jaime. How Will Our Universe
End? Here Are The Top Four Theories.
Futurism. March 23, 2018. Accessed May
15, 2019. https://futurism.com/four-ways-
the-universe-could-end.
4. Hewitt, John. The End: Betting on the
Ultimate Fate of Our Universe.
ExtremeTech. March 24, 2015. Accessed
May 15, 2019.
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/20
1789-the-end-the-ultimate-fate-of-our-
universe.
5. Ostriker, J. P., and L. L. Cowie. Galaxy
Formation in an Intergalactic Medium
Dominated by Explosions. The
Astrophysical Journal. 1981; 243: L127–
L131p. doi:10.1086/183458.
6. Ikeuchi S. Theory of Galaxy Formation
Triggered by Quasar Explosions.
Publications of the Astronomical Society
of Japan. 1981; 33: 211–222p.
7. Cressey D. (2007). Plenty of nothing.
[Online] The Great Beyond Nature.Com.
Available from http://blogs.nature.com/cgi
-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/3329 [Accessed on
August 2007].
8. Zyga L. (2019). Phys.org, No Big Bang?.
[Online] Quantum equation predicts
universe has no beginning. [Online]
Available from http://phys.org/news/2015-
02-big-quantum-equation-
Page 26
 Research & Reviews: Journal of Space Science & Technology
Volume 8, Issue 1
ISSN: 2321-2837 (Online), ISSN: 2321-6506 (Print)
universe.html#jCp [Accessed on April
2019].
9. Ultimate Fate of the Universe.
ScienceDaily. Accessed May 15, 2019.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/terms/ultim
ate_fate_of_the_universe.htm.
10. Colagrossi, Mike. Universal Apocalypse:
This Is How All of Creation Could End.
Big Think. October 07, 2018. Accessed
May 15, 2019. https://bigthink.com/mike-
colagrossi/universal-apocalypse-this-is-
how-all-of-creation-could-end.
RRJoSST (2019) 15-27 © STM Journals 2019. All Rights Reserved
View publication stats
Cite this Article
Rupak Bhattacharya, Pranab Kumar
Bhattacharya, Upasana Bhattacharya,
Ritwik Bhattacharya, Rupsa Bhattacharya,
Ayshi Mukherjee, Dalia Mukherjee,
Hindole Banerjee, Runa Mitra. The Fate of
Our Universe: How This Universe Will
End. Research & Reviews: Journal of
Space Science & Technology. 2019; 8(1):
15–27p.
Page 27