Dark energy (split from is dark energy an illusion)

[Sorcerer]

No one knows what it is. I think it's energy rebalanced from the initial big bang.

 

I think the default condition of the universe is space expanding faster than light.

 

This property divides the universe. The initial condition was one which contained only dark energy. The quantum nature of the vacuum allowed that space to borrow some of this energy to create virtual particles pairs.

 

When space expands faster than the speed of light virtual particles pairs are separated from each other. The random nature of the quantum vacuum meant that a large and dense enough mass could be produced randomly the size of our universe. This would instantly collapse under its own gravity and lack of dark energy.

 

As space collapses particle/anti particle pairs recombine. Some of the energy released is returned to being dark energy.

 

Quantum randomness allowed regions of space to have an imbalance of matter. Some of the energy couldn't be rebalanced. At a tipping point there wasn't enough matter (and dark matter) left lending gravity and borrowing energy to counteract dark energy, space began to expand again but not faster than the speed of light. This is the big bang. Shortly afterwards as more antimatter annihilated the universe returned to a faster expanding state and there was inflation. Inflation too produced mass and slowed itself down.

 

Then there was recombination.

 

Over time, and as galaxies began to pull mass together again, more mass was converted back to dark energy. And still is. This gradual addition accelerates the expansion of space.

 

Random imbalances of 0 allowed for the universe.

Edited December 18, 2015 by Sorcerer

[Strange]

I think the default condition of the universe is space expanding faster than light.

 

Expansion is not a speed, it is a scaling. Therefore "speed" depends on how far apart two points are (this is just basic arithmetic, nothing to do with cosmology). There are now, and always have been, points that are separating faster than light.

[Sorcerer]

 

Expansion is not a speed, it is a scaling. Therefore "speed" depends on how far apart two points are (this is just basic arithmetic, nothing to do with cosmology). There are now, and always have been, points that are separating faster than light.

Good point, I meant on quantum scales. So event horizons seperate particle anti particle pairs before they have a chance to annihilate. Similar to how the expansion of space would be after an extremely long time from now if expansion continues to accelerate unregulated.

[Strange]

Good point, I meant on quantum scales. So event horizons seperate particle anti particle pairs before they have a chance to annihilate.

 

Are you thinking of Hawking radiation there? If so, you need to bear in mind that that analogy (even though Hawking came up with it) does not accurately reflect what happens...

[Sorcerer]

Not really hawking radiation, the event horizon isn't due to a black hole. In the case of hawking radiation the anti particle still annihilates. In this case every particle is locked away from every other due to faster than light expansion of space at every scale. All fermion pairs, due to the Pauli exclusion principle would be permanently separated.

 

Someone else once compared the idea to unruh radiation. This also isn't relevant, when space is expanding this fast there is no relativity, photons will never encounter anything.

 

But the creation of all this new matter must be balanced somehow, if that energy is borrowed from the energy expanding space, it allows for a cyclic universe.

[Mordred]

Sorcerer I think you need to look closely at what you mean by space expanding faster than light. The aspect your missing is that the above applies only over a huge seperation distance. Locally space expands at a mere 70 km/s/Mpc. It's only when you

a separation distance above the Hubble Horizon does the rate appear to expand faster than light. That is an incredible distance. Particle pairs cannot hope to transverse that distance without encountering normal matter and annihilating.

I think the default condition of the universe is space expanding faster than light.

 

This property divides the universe. The initial condition was one which contained only dark energy. The quantum nature of the vacuum allowed that space to borrow some of this energy to create virtual particles pairs.

 

When space expands faster than the speed of light virtual particles pairs are separated from each other.

There was a type of radiation due to expansion you may be interested in. It's rather difficult to find the cosmological application papers on it. It's disappeared from mainstream physics in terms of cosmology. However it was one presented due to inflation/expansion.

 

Parker radiation.

 

Lets run an example Considering inflation's rapid expansion rate it will provide some details on how it may have worked. (Assuming the chaotic inflation model.)inflation involves Particle/antiparticle pairs to maintain conservation of energy rules in particle production. I'll place inflation close to the GUT epock. The inflaton forms in particle pairs

 

 

[latex]w=\frac{\rho}{p}[/latex]

Let's use this relationship and describe the early universe prior to inflation then onto inflation.

A radiation dominant universe will expand as the gravitational potential is insufficient to cause a collapse.

The acceleration equation is given as

[latex]\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}=-\frac{4\pi G\rho}{3c^2}(\rho c^2+3p)[/latex]

This leads to

[latex]H^2=\frac{\dot{a}}{a}=\frac{8\pi G\rho}{3c^2}-\frac{kc^2p}{R_c^2a^2}[/latex]

where k is the curvature constant. Which during the GUT epock can be largely ignored. Via the equation of state

[latex]p=w\rho c^2[/latex]

[latex]\frac{\dot{a}}{a}=-\frac{1}{2}H^2(1+3w)[/latex]

for radiation w=-1/3 matter w=0

From this we can see a radiation dominant universe will expand. In fact it will accelerate when

[latex]w<-1/3(p<-\rho^2/3)[/latex]

When the volume sufficiently increases thereby reducing the temperature quarks, gluons and potentially the Higgs boson can drop out of thermal equilibrium. This process may potentially result in inflation as a phase change. The strong force undergoes symmetry breaking.

The simplest version of inflation is via the inflaton which then dominates expansion.

The inflaton is given by [latex]\varphi[/latex], with potential [latex]V\varphi[/latex]

The pressure of the field is

[latex]p(\varphi)=\frac{1/2\dot{\varphi}^2}{\hbar c+V\varphi}[/latex]

total energy by

[latex]E(\varphi)=\frac{1/2\dot{\varphi}}{\hbar c+V\varphi}[/latex]

with equation of state.

[latex]\frac{1/2\dot{\varphi}^2/\hbar c-V\varphi}{1/2\dot{\varphi}/\hbar c+V\varphi}[/latex]

Even inflation itself includes vacuum hence Allen Guths original inflation model is called "False Vacuum". The false vacuum is a higher energy density region that tunnels through a potential barrier to a lower vacuum region "true vacuum"

This equation describes how the universe expands ,it's more commonly called the deceleration equation. As opposed to acceleration equation.

[latex]\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}=-\frac{4\pi G\rho}{3c^2}(\rho c^2+3p)[/latex]

note the energy density to pressure terms? That derives from the FLRW metric

Just as an added perspective here is the Einstein field equation stress momentum tensor in the Minkowskii form.

[latex]T^{\mu\nu}=(\rho+p)U^{\mu}U^{\nu}+p\eta^{\mu\nu}[/latex]

Even GR uses pressure.

 

I like to point out thermodynamic applications as it's essential to understanding the FLRW metric.

 

 

One should note from the above that space expanding faster than light is not required

Edited December 25, 2015 by Mordred

[Sorcerer]

Mordred, I understand that presently the expansion of space, while accelerating apparently, is slow enough to only create these horizons over very large distances.

 

I did allude to inflation in my original speculation on the a-causal genesis of the universe. Inflation within my idea is a return, or rebound of spacial expansion caused by return of boson/fermion energy to the spatial expansion field. While I don't have the capability to do the math in any detail, the ideas are simple enough.

 

 

One should note from the above that space expanding faster than light is not required.

 

As, you stated, this is dependent on distance, since inflation is faster than current expansion, and space is currently expanding faster than the speed of light over a large distance, then space was expanding faster than the speed of light over a shorter distance during inflation. Also due to dark energy, and accelerating spatial expansion, Hubble volumes are gradually decreasing.

 

What is the predicted size of the Hubble volume during the inflationary epoch in the inflation model?

 

I'll highlight my ideas again, I can see myself some philosophical problems not removed by the speculation, for example I was trying to remove any prior cause or rather describe the default nature of an eternal space. However there still needs explanation as to why the conditions of the vacuum were set this way, and why since I am giving substance to the vacuum it existed in the first place.

 

1. A vacuum exists in which quantum flucuations producing particle anti-particle pairs is possible.

 

2. Energy must be conserved in this vacuum

 

3. The vacuum has energy which makes it expand.

 

4. The initial condition was where over distances small enough for uncertainty to allow pair production separation, the vacuum was expanding faster than the speed of light.

 

_________________________________________

 

5. Particle pairs, produced at a large scale simultaneously over a wide and dense enough area, unable to annihilate, and reducing the local vacuum's energy caused space to decelerate to a point where pair production didn't exclude pair annihilation.

 

6. At this point there was a critical density of matter over an area the size of our universe, where gravity could overcome the horizon boundaries set by expansion.

 

7. This allowed all matter and energy to collapse into an area far below the size of a Hubble volume.

 

8. Like core collapse in a supernova, negative pressure then repelled particles in this dense object, which is where the Big Bang starts.

 

_________________________________________

 

9. All events after this appear as we currently think. The inflationary era being a result of some of the newly formed universe decaying/annihilating and returning it's energy to the vacuum expansion energy.

 

10. The Inflationary epoch ends, because the process of pair production again removes enough vacuum energy to return the universe to a similar rate of expansion as we currently observe (accounting for dark energy's effect over the past 13 or billion years).

 

_________________________________________

 

11. Dark energy is a consequence also of energy being gradually returned to the vacuum.

 

12. Eventually enough energy is returned to the vacuum that again space is expanding fast enough over a small enough distance to allow another possibility of a critically dense area like our universe to form.

______________________________

 

I feel the need to point out how this relates to the OP's question. The "illusion" isn't inflation, but in this case, the universe. Inflation is a consequence of some of what we know to be real, returning to the normal state of affairs. The universe is simply a temporary era (or area) within an empty space which has a preference for extremely fast spatial expansion.

 

There also may be a way to form areas of equilibrium in this expanding vacuum where particle creation is balanced by annihilation and the density of matter and the expansion of space are balanced.

 

But my general feeling is that the universe would tend to return to the inital state of empty vacuum and maximum vacuum expansion energy, the length of time that this takes though is long for there to be a chance of someone like me thinking these thoughts to exist.

Edited December 26, 2015 by Sorcerer

[Mordred]

Ok this is going to be a bit tricky to explain. First off DE isn't required to cause expansion nor contraction. How the universe expands or contracts is due to how particles exert pressure influences via their equations of state. As well as it's overall gravitational influence. For example the first equation I posted shows the energy-density to pressure relationships.

 

[latex]w=\frac{\rho}{p}[/latex]

 

each particle species has kinetic energy in that they bounce off other particles this behavior causes pressure influences. For example relativistic radiation has a high energy density to pressure influence. Matter has negligible pressure influence.

 

If for example you take nothing more than photons with no other contribution or particle species even with a finite number of photons the universe will expand... The rate of expansion however will slow down as more and more volume is created. Now the trick is different particle species has its own energy/density to pressure influence. Also the %of each species varies as the temperature drops.

First you have the radiation dominent era followed by the matter dominant then the Lambda dominant.

 

The above three equations of state is the average energy/mass density to pressure influences of all the particle species during a particular time period. You can look up the equations of state here.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equation_of_state_(cosmology)

 

Now one might think that the rate of expansion today is greater than before (except inflation) but this is how you define "OVER WHAT VOLUME"

 

For example per Mpc the rate of expansion is actually decreasing. Yet on the volume of the universe it is increasing. The reason for the latter is that there is far more Mpc adding up its own per Mpc contribution.

 

dark energy for example is so small of an influence per Mpc it's nearly immeasurable. It's energy density is extremely close to zero. In joules it is roughly [latex]6.0*10^{-10} joules/m^3[/latex]. It's only over a vast volume that dark energy can be measured.

 

In the case of inflation it may be due to the Higgs Boson dropping out of thermal equilibrium.

 

Here is some papers that suggest both inflation and DE may be associated with the Higgs field.

 

 

Higg's inflation possible dark energy

 

http://arxiv.org/abs/1402.3738

http://arxiv.org/abs/0710.3755

http://arxiv.org/abs/1006.2801

 

How a universe expands or contracts involves nothing more than understanding the thermodynamic properties of the particles residing in a given volume. The only mystery is why is DE apparently constant as the volume changes and why is it so fine tuned to close to zero.

 

You don't require virtual particle production to cause expansion. The pressure influence of the particle species merely need to exceed its self gravity.

 

(ps if you look at the acceleration equation section I showed the math for the radiation dominant era). The only contributor needed is relativistic particles. In a finite number.....). The last section used the scalar field equation of state. Higgs boson I'd one example of a scalar field so the same formula can be used

I didn't need to add dark energy to have an expanding universe in the above equations....

Lambda aka dark energy has an equation of state w=-1. Where relativistic radiation is w=1/3. Matter is w=0. I only included the dominant EOS average at the GUT epoch. Which is radiation dominant

Edited December 27, 2015 by Mordred

[Sorcerer]

The only mystery is why is DE apparently constant as the volume changes and why is it so fine tuned to close to zero.

 

You don't require virtual particle production to cause expansion.

In my proposal DE is constant because the rate of decay/annihilation of particles produced in the initial collapse which lead to the universe and again during inflation is constant from then on. As particles return their energy to the expansion energy the acceleration of expansion is produced.

 

Now you might think this violates conservation laws. Firstly no, since everything is returning to an initial state it's conserved. Secondly as you say DE is nearly 0 over small scales, so observation of this effect is unlikely under the rules of classical physics.

 

It is NOT PRODUCTION of virtual particles causing expansion, it is decay/annihilation of VPs originally made real particles by borrowing energy from expansion energy and prevented from then annihilating. VP production has 0 net effect normally, because VPs produced with energy borrowed from expansion energy quickly annihilate again; UNLESS they are prevented from doing so because the space between them is expanding so fast they cannot. This only happens 3 times in my speculation,1 initially,2 during inflation and 3 some very distant time from now.

 

There is only one other distinct phase, the initial collapse of the universe, causes by forcing VPs back together, the rate of annihilation to hugely increase and thus pushes the rate of expansion up which leads to initial expansion and shortly after inflation.

 

At all other times there is a gradual rate of decay returning energy to the initial energy of expansion.

Edited December 27, 2015 by Sorcerer

[Mordred]

The problem is your proposed model has already been tried. Aka Parker radiation. Virtual particle production models ie the zero point energy universe etc based upon the quantum harmonic oscillator and Heisenburg uncertainty principle all suffer one flaw.that being the ground state.

 

"Zero-point energy, also called quantum vacuum zero-point energy"

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-point_energy

 

your not the first to think of this... The problem is the ground state leads to 120 orders of magnitude too much energy... your universe would fly apart.

 

So unless you can show with math a lower ground state. You have no viable model. In fact without showing the math you have no model...

[Sorcerer]

There is only one other question. Why didn't all pairs annihilate during the initial collapse?

 

Because the rate of decay of anti particles is higher than normal.

That's why it didn't fly apart.

[Mordred]

(PS I've lost count on the number of VP models I've studied.). None of them fully work and they included the math. The majority failed when they discovered the ground state was too high....

[Sorcerer]

It took some time for there to be an area of critical density to collapse into the big bang, that allowed enough time for the matter imbalance to prevent the total annihilation. And there to be a balancing gravitational effect.

 

I may ask, why didn't the universe fly apart under normal models of inflation?

[Mordred]

There is only one other question. Why didn't all pairs annihilate during the initial collapse?

 

Because the rate of decay of anti particles is higher than normal.

That's why it didn't fly apart.

Sorcerer VP production is still going it's an everyday occurance that never stops. You need to study the math involved. Even at the lowest level based on the ground point (minimal energy) there would be too much energy.

[Sorcerer]

 

The ground state is indeed higher than the state during inflation, they vary by how much energy the remaining universe took from the ground state.

[Mordred]

It took some time for there to be an area of critical density to collapse into the big bang, that allowed enough time for the matter imbalance to prevent the total annihilation. And there to be a balancing gravitational effect.

 

I may ask, why didn't the universe fly apart under normal models of inflation?

Sounds like your after cyclic universe if that's what your after look at LQC loop quantum gravity models. It uses your virtual particles as spin foam

[Sorcerer]

Sorcerer VP production is still going it's an everyday occurance that never stops. You need to study the math involved. Even at the lowest level based on the ground point (minimal energy) there would be too much energy.

They are produced but then annihilated, the net effect is 0. Not all VPs are produced from expansion energy, they can borrow energy from photons too.

Edited December 27, 2015 by Sorcerer

[Mordred]

It would take far too long to post all the math of LQC.

They are produced but then annihilated, the net effect is 0. Not all VPs are produced from expansion energy, they can borrow energy from photons too.

Like I said you need to study the math instead of making blanket declarations. All VP models involves annihilation. They all borrow energy.

 

Virtual particles cannot be created without the energy coming from somewhere

[Sorcerer]

Sounds like your after cyclic universe if that's what your after look at LQC loop quantum gravity models. It uses your virtual particles as spin foam

I haven't looked at it, but yes the initial critical mass would be a foam. It would have holes where some of the particles had decayed, the majority being antiparticles.

It would take far too long to post all the math of LQC.

 

Like I said you need to study the math instead of making blanket declarations. All VP models involves annihilation. They all borrow energy.

 

Virtual particles cannot be created without the energy coming from somewhere

That energy is the expansion energy initially and it's borrowed it will return to that state.

[Mordred]

I suggest you sit down and study the math. Virtual particles to explain inflation has been around since before Allen Guths false vacuum in the 80's there were well over 70+ inflation models that used variations of it. There is still models today that still try...

 

So how can your possibly work or convince anyone without math ahead of the hundreds of attempts with the math????

That energy is the expansion energy initially and it's borrowed it will return to that state.

Expansion doesn't have it's own energy. Expansion is due to the energy of the equations of state of other particles. Of which I showed how it works above.

 

I also explained that those processes should decrease as the volume increases. If you borrow that energy it would not change the rate as the above process already involves annihilation and production of particles. Most particles have short lifetimes and pop in and out of existence.

 

Including photons

Here is the 70+ inflation models I mentioned.

 

 

Encyclopaedia Inflationaris

http://arxiv.org/abs/1303.3787

 

The ones in that article are only the ones that are still considered viable. Hundreds came before and were found not to fit observation

Edited December 27, 2015 by Mordred

[Mordred]

I did some digging and found a decent Parker radiation article for you

 

http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.5616

[Sorcerer]

Sorcerer VP production is still going it's an everyday occurance that never stops. You need to study the math involved. Even at the lowest level based on the ground point (minimal energy) there would be too much energy.

By too much energy I assume you mean, that the universe would simply rip itself apart again, correct?

 

I was just reading about gravitational waves and they carry away energy, if there is too much energy in the ground point, could a collapse of a local area where gravitational waves from the merger carry away energy allow for a stable universe?

[Mordred]

The rate of expansion would be too fast For galaxies and large scale clusters to form. QMs quantum harmonic oscillator produced 120 orders of magnitude too Mich energy. This would make the rate of expansion far greater than observation.

Edited January 9, 2016 by Mordred

[Sorcerer]

Couldn't the initial rate of expansion be reduced by having it spend that energy on the creation of matter and then further countered by matter pulling together under gravity? Do these models attempt to input a balance like this into the equation, or simply just let matter creation occur at the same time as being ripped apart ?

 

Couldn't there be an area which collapses away from the rest of the universe, 1 order of magnitude dropping out of the other 120.

Edited January 9, 2016 by Sorcerer

[Mordred]

Some of those ideas were proposed, but later found didn't work as new research developed. WMAP and Planck data killed a lot of models. Many of which never made it to pop media. Nor did they ever make it to textbooks. Some ppl like myself that has been studying cosmology and visiting forums since the 80s may recall some of them. Forums before WMAP were entertaining. For example everyone had a different idea for the shape of the universe. Mond was regularly discussed, ppl hated LCDM, quintessence was once popular.

 

Dark energy and dark matter discussion was still frowned upon. No one wanted to accept them and tried to find unusual solutions.

 

 

The variation that comes to mind as closest from my readings was a variation of ADS/CFT. Where you have a background dimension where the Cosmological constant would briefly interact with our dimensional space.

 

(Dimension as in a mathematical interaction).

 

For example one can assign the electromagnetic field a separate dimension and model it as a fifth dimension accurately.

The other possibility is some suppression of the harmonic oscillator. I might still have that paper. If I recall Tamara Davies once proposed that idea.

Edited January 9, 2016 by Mordred