Universe from nothing.

[praty]

Can the universe arise out of nothing? Quantum 'nothing' is now a boiling bubbling brew of matter popping in and out of existence, which accounts for the majority of the mass an atom has. What are the implications of this theory?

[csmyth3025]

Can the universe arise out of nothing? Quantum 'nothing' is now a boiling bubbling brew of matter popping in and out of existence, which accounts for the majority of the mass an atom has. What are the implications of this theory?

There are plausible conjectures that our universe may have formed out of nothing. For example:

 

...The idea that the Universe may have appeared out of nothing at all, and contains zero energy overall, was developed by Edward Tryon, of the City University in New York, who suggested in the 1970s, that it might have appeared out of nothing as a so-called vacuum fluctuation, allowed by quantum theory. Quantum uncertainty allows the temporary creation of bubbles of energy, or pairs of particles (such as electron-positron pairs) out of nothing, provided that they disappear in a short time. The less energy is involved, the longer the bubble can exist. Curiously, the energy in a gravitational field is negative, while the energy locked up in matter is positive. If the Universe is exactly flat , then as Tryon pointed out the two numbers cancel out, and the overall energy of the Universe is precisely zero. In that case, the quantum rules allow it to last forever..

(ref. http://www.lifesci.s...ibbin/cosmo.htm )

 

The implications of such conjectures are that that our universe (and, perhaps, others) may have formed out of nothing.

 

I'm not aware that the majority of the mass of an atom is attributed to quantum fluctuations.

 

Chris

[Airbrush]

Chris: "....The implications of such conjectures are that that our universe (and, perhaps, others) may have formed out of nothing."

 

What confuses people is what astrophysicists call "nothing" is more than the average person thinks nothing is. "Nothing" is filled with potentiality which gets expressed in any number of ways over infinite lengths of time.

[ydoaPs]

Perhaps you could check out this thread.

 

[praty]

yoda,

 

Yep, I got that thought chain after watching Prof. Krauss. It makes both the threads similar. I'm new here and it looks like you guys have already covered everything!

 

My question though would be how does this knowledge affect our community in general.

[DrRocket]

Can the universe arise out of nothing? Quantum 'nothing' is now a boiling bubbling brew of matter popping in and out of existence, which accounts for the majority of the mass an atom has. What are the implications of this theory?

 

Conjectures and speculation aside, current theory is unable to make predfictions much earlier than about 10^-33 seconds after the big bang. So nobody really knows what happened at t=0 or whether or not the universe "came out of nothing".

 

That of course does not stop all sorts of people from making statements and selling books dealing with the ultimate origin of the universe. Buyer beware.

 

One of the characteristics of a good scientist is the ability to utter the words "I don't know."

Edited April 28, 2011 by DrRocket

[Airbrush]

One of the characteristics of a good scientist is the ability to utter the words "I don't know."

 

I agree. And I like it even better if they say "I don't know....but ya wanna know what I think?"

 

Yes I do.

[csmyth3025]

...I'm not aware that the majority of the mass of an atom is attributed to quantum fluctuations.

 

Chris

After viewing the lecture given by Prof. Krauss (YouTube video in previous post by ydoaPs), it's obvious that I need to read up on the current thinking on this subject.

 

Chris

[praty]

Moving the thought forward, if universe did begin with quantum fluctuations, can our science someday posses the knowledge and technology to do the same

[rktpro]

...can our science someday posses the knowledge and technology to do the same

 

You used 'can' and it might mean positive or negative capability. Look, we never know about future. We never knew that someday voice chat would be possible, we never knew the someday we could go to moon and discover space.

We don't possess energy to do that.

But, one day we might...

[icarus2]

Hello

I’m sorry. I can’t English well. My native language is not English.

 

[math]\begin{array}{l}

TotalEnergy = 0 = Nothing = 0 = ( + E) + ( - E) = still - zero \\

= (\sum + m_ + c^2 ) + (\sum - m_ - c^2 ) + (\sum potential - energy) = 0 \\

\end{array}[/math]

 

0 = Nothing

But, (+E),(-E), [math]

(\sum + m_ + c^2 ) [/math] and [math]

(\sum - m_ - c^2 ) [/math] are somthing.

 

[birth of the Universe from “Nothing”]

 

 

[ Birth of the Universe from the Zero Energy State ]

 

1)There was a pair creation of positive and negative energy in the early universe.

 

2)The total energy of universe is 0.

Stephen Hawking and Alan Guth et al. argued that gravitational potential energy is negative energy, and that such gravitational potential energy can offset all positive mass energy during a period of inflation.

 

3) The acceleration in the expansion of the universe observed suggests the existence of positive energy out of mass energy, and alternatively, it corresponds to what the overall gravitational potential energy of the universe has positive value, indicating that gravitational potential energy will not able to offset positive energy.

 

4) Nothing but the gravitational potential energy doesn’t completely offset mass energy. And for the birth of the universe from “nothing” and energy conservation at the birth of the universe, “negative mass”, which corresponds to “negative energy”, is needed.

 

5)The basic principle of physics of “lower state of energy is stable!” is wrong. So it should be modified to “lower state of energy as far as positive mass is concerned and higher state of energy as far as negative mass is concerned is stable!”.

 

6)“Transition to the energy level of minus infinity”, which was used to deny the existence of negative mass, did not occur, whereas a. Relativistic energy eq., b. Dirac eq., c. field equation existed, suggesting the existence of negative mass.

 

 

[ Void Structure results from~ ]

1)The presence of primitive void due to a pair annihilation of positive mass and negative mass.

2)The presence of void due to gravitational contraction between positive mass and repulsive effect between negative mass.

 

 

[ Birth and Expansion of the Universe from singular point(or domain) ]

 

1)Even though all the mass of the universe come together in one small area on Big Bang, it does not have the same density as the black hole due to offsetting of density between positive mass and negative mass. Therefore it can be expandable.

 

2)The law of motion of positive mass and negative mass naturally explains that “expansion after birth” is the essential characteristics of the universe.

 

3)The expansion of the universe takes place in the state of total rest mass energy of “0” and, clusters of galaxies and the void structure can be achieved.

 

4)Energy conservation and momentum conservation exists without giving the initial velocity, and expansion of the universe occurs.

 

5)It does not require any other force except already known force, gravity.

 

 

---Icarus2

==========

Hypothesis of dark matter and dark energy with negative mass :

http://vixra.org/abs/0907.0015

 

[simulation Video-1]

Centripetal force effect in the galaxy from dark matter(negative mass) halo out of the galaxy!

Edited April 30, 2011 by icarus2

[praty]

You used 'can' and it might mean positive or negative capability.

 

Huh??

 

You saying it is possible, right? Or are you agnostic about the chances?

[rktpro]

Huh??

 

You saying it is possible, right? Or are you agnostic about the chances?

 

Agnostic.