How to Create energy ?

[alpha2cen]

And is there any physical reason to assume that the universe was preceded by its absence?

 

Far before the beginning of the universe there was something.

It may be different from the energy and the mass what we know.

At the present we do not know the beginning components.

Similar example is like this, i.e., we had thought vacuum is nothing in the past.

But now we know there is something in the vacuum.

Edited February 7, 2011 by alpha2cen

[lemur]

Do you think it was a big ball of energy and from this energy was changed into mass?

Me saying what "I think" it was shifts the issue away from why would anyone assume that something has to be preceded by its absence? Further, if it was anything prior to its beginning, the transformation could be described in terms of temporal progress. So if you take the logic of the big bang seriously, that spacetime actually began with the big-bang's initiation of its expansion, then anything that occurred prior to anything else still occurred as part of the expansion of spacetime.

 

To answer your question, though, I personally think that force preceded energy but I don't think we're supposed to discuss our personal opinions. I could give you my reasons for thinking this though, but maybe someone else will say that someone more credible has better reasons for saying it started as a big (or small) ball (or point) of energy. Maybe someone else will say that it started as something else completely and transformed into energy or some other presently recognizable form (as alpha2cen suggested).

 

 

[michel123456]

Depends on how you keep the books. Gravitational potential energy is negative.

 

If it is the only form of negative energy, and in order to cancel all other forms of positive energy, gravitational potential energy must be immense.

[Mr Skeptic]

If it is the only form of negative energy, and in order to cancel all other forms of positive energy, gravitational potential energy must be immense.

 

Electromagnetic potential energy is also usually considered negative (because it is so much easier to start off at infinity than at some unknown minimum distance). However only gravity is significant at such large scales.

[alpha2cen]

Inflation and cooling, then, where is the energies go in the cooling step?

i.e.

Inflation----- no energy remove-----> Inflation

Inflation----- energy remove---------> particle generation

Then, how to remove the energy homogeneously?

Edited February 9, 2011 by alpha2cen

[Solve]

Inflation and cooling, then, where is the energies go in the cooling step?

 

 

 

 

Energy goes to the System which is doing the Cooling.

 

 

 

[alpha2cen]

Energy goes to the System which is doing the Cooling.

 

 

 

 

The Universe energy is removed at the cooling step.

The theory inflation state is an expanded high energy state.

It does not mean, I know, expansion cooling.

Edited February 9, 2011 by alpha2cen

[Pwyll Pendefig Dyfed]

Do you think it was a big ball of energy and from this energy was changed into mass?

 

Aren't Energy and mass linked? According to E=mc2 they are.

[Hearts]

If everything must have a beginning, then all beginnings should have beginnings. It means at one point before the beginnings of beginnings, there are no beginnings? Paradoxical.

Anyway back to topic,

First law of thermodynamics. It is not known, nor will it ever be..if the law is actually wrong. Though it has been right so far...and likely to be right all along. Hmm..but one does wonder....

Edited February 23, 2011 by Hearts

[swansont]

Conservation of energy is a consequence of the time invariance of physical law. As long as physics isn't changing, energy must be conserved.

[Holland44]

Energy cannot be created or destroyed. And as for the big bang, I think it is highly credible given what string theory tells us about our reality. A concentrated vibrating mass would eventual diffuse, much like Brownian Motion.

[swansont]

!

Moderator Note

Cosvis1's speculative tangent has been split off http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/55512-big-bang-and-other-musings/

[Riot]

Make a mechanical machine that conducts mass separation of protons from oxygen.

 

That is the closest you can get. "Making"(isolation) energy from "nothing"(takes up no space).

 

 

 

 

 

 

[keelanz]

this is (probably) your mathematical version of something as anything(?)? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiom

 

so to create energy you simply (probably) create(discover) a nonexistent system

 

i dont believe e=mc^2 so i think ill sit on my own side of the fence

Edited April 8, 2011 by keelanz

[Zant]

Energy cant be destroyed or created only changed so you cant make energy only use the energy that already exists.

 

[swansont]

!

Moderator Note

Speculation on energy has been split http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/56653-energy/