SPAM This thread is for random spam!!

[Scouse]

Yep, but:

All both studies are saying is that the accelerating expansion *might* be slowing, but that doesn't mean the universe will stop expanding, just that it may eventually expand at a fixed rate (which is actually what people thought before Dark Energy was discovered).

If it's slowing, why would the slowing down stop and expansion happen stably? I.E. what would make a changing system become a stable system?

Also, if it's slowing, might it not get to a point where it stops? And if it stops, why not collapse back?

All these seem perfectly reasonable hypothesis.

 

[Zarjazz]

why would the ... expansion happen stably?

The expansion originated with the Big Bang, you could call it one of the universe's initial conditions. It was believed that after the initial 'kick', that was it. It was during measurements in the 1980s that it was discovered that the rate of expansion appeared to be increasing. That was both an unexpected and unexplained result, that is still the case even now. The effect was labelled 'Dark Energy', since where is all that energy coming from to power that acceleration?

Also, if it's slowing, might it not get to a point where it stops? And if it stops, why not collapse back?

Fair, I did simplify a few things in my previous answer The whole reason for those original measurements was to answer exactly that question. They knew the universe was expanding after the Big Bang, but that was being counteracted by the force of gravity from all the mass in the universe. So they were trying to work out the precise numbers of each to see if the universe would slowly expand forever, reach a static state, or end in a Big Crunch. With the discovery of Dark Energy the answer seemed clear (though it wouldn't be a slow expansion, but one that got faster and faster). These latest measurements, if true, simply complicate the analysis even further. They do not say, unlike what the article is stating, what the final result will be.