The Big Rip and Virtual Particles.

[Sorcerer]

The idea of Dark energy - the accelerating expansion of the universe - leads to the inevitable conclusion of a big rip (that is where all the universes particles are receeding away from each other faster than the speed of light (each particle has its own event horizon), leading to heat death and infinite entropy (correct me on that if I'm wrong))

 

Since virtual particle/anit-particle pairs are thought to come into existence in the vacuum and annihilate each other almost instantaneously, at the big rip wouldn't these particles be forced apart before they can annihilate each other again? Almost like hawking radiation, except the event horizon is created around all particles.

 

Since space is providing this energy, by allowing it to transition from virtual to real, wouldn't it reduce the volume of space?

 

Would this lead to an increase in mass and therefore gravity that would then halt or perhaps reverse the expansion of space?

 

Just a thought I had, can u point out its flaws or verify it?

[Sorcerer]

No thoughts?

 

Was my post too vague or too complex? I could rephrase it.

 

The Big Rip http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_big_rip

 

Virtual Particles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_particles

 

Hawking Radiation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_Radiation

 

Another thought, if the universe was expanding faster than the speed of light during inflation, could this same process have created matter and slowed inflation?

 

Could Dark energy then be this matters slow decay back into the "borrowed" vacuum energy, thus reverting at an increasing rate to the original faster than speed of light expansion that was inflation - which is also the big rip?

[zapatos]

The idea of Dark energy - the accelerating expansion of the universe - leads to the inevitable conclusion of a big rip (that is where all the universes particles are receeding away from each other faster than the speed of light (each particle has its own event horizon), leading to heat death and infinite entropy (correct me on that if I'm wrong))

I believe that rather than all particles receding from each other, you would have superclusters receding from each other. Dark energy is not strong enough to break apart gravitationally bound systems (or rocks).

[DrRocket]

The idea of Dark energy - the accelerating expansion of the universe - leads to the inevitable conclusion of a big rip (that is where all the universes particles are receeding away from each other faster than the speed of light (each particle has its own event horizon), leading to heat death and infinite entropy (correct me on that if I'm wrong))

 

Since virtual particle/anit-particle pairs are thought to come into existence in the vacuum and annihilate each other almost instantaneously, at the big rip wouldn't these particles be forced apart before they can annihilate each other again? Almost like hawking radiation, except the event horizon is created around all particles.

 

Since space is providing this energy, by allowing it to transition from virtual to real, wouldn't it reduce the volume of space?

 

Would this lead to an increase in mass and therefore gravity that would then halt or perhaps reverse the expansion of space?

 

Just a thought I had, can u point out its flaws or verify it?

 

To address this question what is needed is a validated theory that can combine gravity (general relativity) with quantum mechanics (quantum field theories as in the Standard Model of particle physics).

 

Unfortunately no such theory currently exists.

[Sorcerer]

Hmmm, but Hawking Radiation addresses a very similiar problem/question without a unified theory. And thats all to do about quantum virtual particles and black holes. Couldn't get a better mix of gravity and quanta there.

 

I am liking this idea, actually the more I think about it, it could be used to describe a cyclic universe removing the big bang. Our initial inflation couldve been part of another universes great rip. I also gives rise to a multiverse, which removes anthropic principle problems.

[Widdekind]

GR may imply, that anti-matter anti-gravitates, i.e. "anti-matter curves the space-time fabric the other way", e.g. "anti-matter makes the rubber sheet bulge upwards".

 

If so, and if matter-antimatter quanta pairs were "preserved", by the stretching of the space-time fabric, then the mutual repulsion, between all of the matter & antimatter, might offset, all of the attractions, amongst the matter, and (separately) amongst the anti-matter.

 

The "popping into existence", of antimatter-matter quanta pairs, may represent the "emergence", of both "antimatter mountains" & "matter valleys", in the fabric of space-time, coming from, and causing, zero net curvature.

[questionposter]

Actually, wait another minute, how could the big rip happen if force can only be carried at the speed of light?

[IM Egdall]

An interesting idea, Sorcerer! The big rip at some point becomes so strong it separates out virtual particles from the "vacuum", and they become real particles. But do these new real particles slow down or halt the rip? I donno.

 

 

And yes, I believe this is similar to the process of inflation, where the exponential expansion of space just after the big bang separated the virtual particles as they popped out of the "vacuum", resulting in the real particles which now make up our universe. (or those that are left after matter-antimatter annihilations -- but that's another story.) I don't think it was this appearance of real particles which slowed inflation, but I may be wrong.

 

Oh, and it is OK for the expansion to go faster than the speed of light. Per Einstein, nothing can go through space faster than the speed of light, but space itself can and does expand faster than the speed of light.

[DrRocket]

Hmmm, but Hawking Radiation addresses a very similiar problem/question without a unified theory. And thats all to do about quantum virtual particles and black holes. Couldn't get a better mix of gravity and quanta there.

 

I am liking this idea, actually the more I think about it, it could be used to describe a cyclic universe removing the big bang. Our initial inflation couldve been part of another universes great rip. I also gives rise to a multiverse, which removes anthropic principle problems.

 

And Hawking radiation was predicted on the basis of quantum field theory on curved spacetime. That is in fact a rather shaky foundation and it is not certain that Hawking radiation is actually a viable phenomena -- it is thought to be viable but there is no experimental evidence on only the noted shaky theoretical foundation.

 

To really answer the question of Hawking radiation will require the previously mentioned theory that unifies quantum theory and general relativity.

 

In point of fact the pop-sci explanation of Hawking radiation involvind virtual particles becoming real particles at the event horizon is just pop-scie nonsense. In quantum field theory on curved spacetime one loses the very concept of a particle. It is in fact not really a well-formulated theory (and that says rather lot since even ordinary quantum field theory is in fact not well-formulated from a mathematical perspective, but on curved spaceetime things are taken to a new level of imprecision).