The Big Bounce theory posits that the universe undergoes a cyclical process of expansion and contraction, suggesting that the universe expands from a previous collapse, rather than starting from a singular Big Bang. In contrast, the Big Bang theory describes the origin of the universe from an extremely hot and dense state roughly 13.8 billion years ago, leading to its ongoing expansion. The Big Crunch is a hypothetical scenario where the universe's expansion eventually halts and reverses, causing it to collapse back into a singularity, potentially leading to another Big Bang. These concepts explore different aspects of the universe's lifecycle and its ultimate fate.
The Big Crunch hypothesis.
The theory that suggests for every big bang there is a crunch is known as the "Big Crunch" theory. It proposes that the expansion of the universe will eventually stop and reverse, leading to a contraction of the universe back to a singular point, followed by another big bang.
The Big Bounce theory suggests that the universe expands and contracts in a continuous cycle, with each cycle ending in a "big crunch" followed by a new "big bang." This theory is an alternative to the Big Bang theory and proposes that the universe has no beginning or end.
No. Universe A expands from a 'Big Bang' stops expanding, and contracts until there is a 'Big Crunch'. Then there is a new big bang and the beginning of Universe B, a middle, and another big crunch, a big bang with Universe C and so on. At the time of any 'big crunch', all matter and energy from that universe ceases to exist. It cannot manifest itself until after the next 'big bang', and then has no relation to anything in its previous manifestation.
According to current scientific understanding, another Big Bang is not expected to occur. The Big Bang theory describes the origin of the universe as a singular event that happened approximately 13.8 billion years ago. The universe is currently expanding, and theories about its future suggest scenarios like continued expansion or a potential Big Crunch, but none imply a repeat of the initial singularity. Thus, there is no timeline for another Big Bang.
in big bang theory the particles will just move away outside. while in big bounce, a stage will come when all the particles once again will form singularity as the result of big crunch. that's what i think.
The big bang is a one off, the big bounce is cyclic.
The Big Crunch hypothesis.
The theory that suggests for every big bang there is a crunch is known as the "Big Crunch" theory. It proposes that the expansion of the universe will eventually stop and reverse, leading to a contraction of the universe back to a singular point, followed by another big bang.
yes it will happen again after the big crunch then of course, the big munch..... At present there is no evidence that another Big Bang will occur.
The Big Bounce theory suggests that the universe expands and contracts in a continuous cycle, with each cycle ending in a "big crunch" followed by a new "big bang." This theory is an alternative to the Big Bang theory and proposes that the universe has no beginning or end.
The big bang theory is the explosion that started the universe. Where as the big crunch is the theory where the universe will eventually contract and become increasingly clumped and eventaully all mater would collapse into black holes which would then coalesce producing a unified black hole or Big Crunch singularity.
There may be at some point near the end of the universe, if the whole universe does the opposite of the Big Bang. Should the universe implode into one big mass in what we call the Big Crunch, another Big Bang could follow. Humans may not experience this because as it stands now, when our Sun dies, Earth dies. Additionally, nothing we know of could survive the Big Crunch.
yes it states that the universe will stop expanding and start crunching back up to a state before the big bang
There is no data on what might have occurred before the Big Bang. There is not even a consensus on whether the phrase "before the Big Bang" is valid to begin with.That having been said, cosmologists now strongly favour non-cyclical models of the universe; the hypothesis that the Big Bang might be a continuation of the cosmos following a preceding Big Crunch is very much out of favour.
No. Universe A expands from a 'Big Bang' stops expanding, and contracts until there is a 'Big Crunch'. Then there is a new big bang and the beginning of Universe B, a middle, and another big crunch, a big bang with Universe C and so on. At the time of any 'big crunch', all matter and energy from that universe ceases to exist. It cannot manifest itself until after the next 'big bang', and then has no relation to anything in its previous manifestation.
The Big Crunch is the opposite of the Big Bang. It will occur if there is enough matter in the Universe to slow down and reverse it's present expansion. Rather than constantly expanding, everything already in place will come together. That can't be a good thing...