2
$\begingroup$

One model for the end of the Universe says that space will continue to expand faster and faster, until even atoms are ripped apart in the so called big Rip.

It is also stated by QCD (quantum chromodynamics) which model the behaviour of the strong nuclear force (quarks and glueons) that as you try to separating quarks they have a property of color confinement where instead of separating they spawn new matter (hadronization).

So I am making only 2 assumptions

  • the big rip will rip even atoms apart (I've read it described this way)

In physical cosmology, the Big Rip is a hypothetical cosmological model concerning the ultimate fate of the universe, in which the matter of the universe, from stars and galaxies to atoms and subatomic particles, and even spacetime itself, is progressively torn apart by the expansion of the universe

  • Color confinement wont allow you to rip quarks apart.

In quantum chromodynamics (QCD), color confinement, often simply called quark confinement, is the phenomenon that color charged particles (such as quarks and gluons) cannot be isolated, and therefore cannot be directly observed in normal conditions below the Hagedorn temperature of approximately 2 trillion kelvin ... Quarks and gluons cannot be separated from their parent hadron without producing new hadrons.

Going by the "Big Rip theory" the universe expands to the point where the very atoms are ripped apart. But what happens when you try to rip quarks apart. Color confinement seems to suggest that you would create a shower of new matter. This would seem to me to create conditions that mimic the early universe. Including Quark Gluon plasma, initial rapid inflation. The expansion would still be going at lightspeed or more. But once you create enough matter, it's gravity would kick in and slow the universe back down to a reasonable rate. Then you would wind up with a tug of war between expansion and gravity, just like we have.

I can imagine a time when the universe is expanding faster then the speed of light, as the cosmological horizon contracts, gravity would weaken as matter moves out of the universe. The speed of expansion would increase and increase in a feedback loop. At some point a random atom would be torn apart causing a cascade of new matter (via color confinement) this new matter would be carried for a time (inflation) this would have the effect of dumping or sinking all that expansion energy into the production of new matter in this small part of space until gravity balanced the rate of expansion slowing the process. Everything outside this space would have been moving much faster then the speed of light(because of expansion) there by cutting it off forever from the new universe.

Or am I crazy. I am sure I am missing quite a bit as I am no physicist nor to I have the math background for much of this stuff. But it just seemed like all these pieces fit together.

Are there any theories of models of cosmology that mirror this.

$\endgroup$

closed as off-topic by Chris, ACuriousMind Feb 4 '18 at 11:02

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

  • "We deal with mainstream physics here. Questions about the general correctness of unpublished personal theories are off topic, although specific questions evaluating new theories in the context of established science are usually allowed. For more information, see Is non mainstream physics appropriate for this site?." – Chris, ACuriousMind
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Why is this non-mainstream? The big rip isn't confirmed, but it's plausible; the same goes for color confinement, no? Perhaps the creation of matter described by ArtisticPhoenix at the end isn't mainstream physics, but the question "what happens when you try to rip quarks apart" looks valid to me. $\endgroup$ – Allure Feb 6 '18 at 2:14
  • $\begingroup$ It was somewhat longer and less strait forward before, so I trimmed it down a bit. $\endgroup$ – ArtisticPhoenix Feb 6 '18 at 2:15
  • $\begingroup$ Related: physics.stackexchange.com/a/8318/31335 $\endgroup$ – Logan R. Kearsley Jul 17 at 1:16