The Problem of Time leads to a Problem of Energy for the Universe

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience Archive' started by Reiku, Jan 10, 2012.

  1. Crunchy Cat F-in' *meow* baby!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,423
    Negative energy is an energy IOU. It subtracts from positive energy. A proven example of negative energy is one of the particles in a virtual particle pair.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Crunchy Cat F-in' *meow* baby!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,423
    Colleges come equipped with a fun little bunch of folks called guidance counselors. They take what you know, where you want to be, and make a custom path for you to get there. That is probably where you want to start.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    I could recite negative energy properties of the vacuum simply from starting with the Dirac Equation predicting a sea of negative energy electrons. That soon developed into a quantum field theory which stated these negative energy fluctuations came in the form of virtual particles, which has been considered mainstream knowledge since the confirmation of the zero point energy field. Energy particles with negative signs therefor atleast happen with a mathematical sign change, whether one is truely positive or negative is in the eye of the beholder.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    Maybe so.

    I'd have to travel to Glasgow everyday tho, which would take 1 hour 30 mins... and it's not simply a car drive for me.

    I don't drive, to get to one destination, I need to travel by boat. To get to another I need to travel by train to finish of with a fair walk on foot.

    I might sound lazy, but it is a lot to ask for a student here. I felt sorry for myself alone while doing college which is half a journey away, a lot of the time failing to get home at all because the boats have been cancelled due to typically shit scottish weather

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    lol
     
  8. wlminex Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,587
    An energy IOU? WTF! . . . I'm not a CPA . . . has 'negative' energy or virtual particle pairs actually been 'proven' or are they just hypothetical or mathematical constructs . . . BTW . . . that's one example . . . there MUST be more . . . or is THAT the only one??
     
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2012
  9. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    Of course there is more examples.

    In the Casimir Effect, as the distance get's increasingly smaller as the seperation between the two plates enclose, the energy becomes increasingly negative, hence why in the Casimir Effect that the negative energy makes an appearance in the equations... needless to say, I am under the impression it is a very small amount though, not enough to harvest anyway.
     
  10. Crunchy Cat F-in' *meow* baby!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,423
    Yep.

    They were demonstrated to be real by Steve Lamoreaux in 1996.

    That is the only demonstrable example I am aware of off the top of my head.
     
  11. Crunchy Cat F-in' *meow* baby!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,423
    Solution: dormatory :3
     
  12. wlminex Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,587
    . . . But, is not the zero point energy (ZPE) field also a mathematical construct? Without quoting a lot of math . . . can you provide me with a few narrative links or citations that actually have "PROVED" the ZPE field exists?
     
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2012
  13. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    There was some talk a while back about the Van der Wall forces, but I can honestly say this:

    The zero point energy field was recognized by Einstein. It was believe it or not, a consequence of quantum mechanics itself. The only reason the Casmir Effect was discovered was simply because it's creator realized that quantum mechanics allowed this phenomenon to occur.

    It is definately the activity of short quantum fluctuation's which can violate certain conservation laws.That is really all the needs to be known... ... mind you, assuming you knew already that the vaccum was a bubbling sheet of virtual particles anyhow.
     
  14. wlminex Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,587
    Reiku Quote: "It is definately the activity of short quantum fluctuation's which can violate certain conservation laws.That is really all the needs to be known... ... mind you, assuming you knew already that the vaccum was a bubbling sheet of virtual particles anyhow."

    So, at least at the quantum level . . . certain conservation 'LAWS' CAN be violated . . . I guess by mathematical inference that, at the quantum level, some physical (GR) laws (like energy? gravity?, for instance?) do not apply?

    . . .a bubbling 'sheet' (2-D? or 3-D? . . . 'sheet' infers 2-D) . . . Yes, you are likely correct . . . BTW . . . my hypothesis (elsewhere in Sciforums - Alternative Theories) speculates a similar phenomenon . . . transition from a (yet) undetectible energy universe matrix (pre-universe?) . . . via intermediary virtual particle production . . . to mass (observable universe) . . . kind of an 'energy evaporation' process, but with some qualifiers.
     
  15. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    By the way,

    \(\dot{\chi} = i(\frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial \dot{q_i}} \cdot d_) \nabla^2\)

    Is a classical limitation. The main reason is because if anyone decides to take the integral of this equation will end up with the equivalent of a world-line of an object to which you would take a slice out of in order to measure the duration. Taking an integral of this nature would do this assuming the steps \(\delta (x)\) are made in small progressions since large steps would result in an oscillating system.
     
  16. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    Sorry, that really should be written asn \(\delta (\vec{x})\) to account for the three dimensions of space, the time dependance comes from derivatives.
     
  17. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    An oscillating system is equivalent to a metric which is fluctuating after some kind of quantization method.
     
  18. wlminex Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,587
    Reiku Quote: "The zero point energy field was recognized by Einstein"

    Can you point me to a reference for this statement? . . . I've not read Einstein's works for quite a while . . . BTW it is interesting to me that his "Cosmological Constant" ideas seem to now be being revisited under different guises . . . . Perhaps it was not "the greatest mistake" of his life (paraphrasing AE here).

    Cheers!
     
  19. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    I should elaborate more on the derivision: It was set on the principle of the dynamics

    \(\dot{\chi} = i(\frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial \dot{q_i}} \cdot d) \nabla^2\)

    \(\dot{\chi}\) was the ''primordial matter field'' which was being taken with it's derivative of time, which provided us with units of mass over time. This is the general mass flow rate. To have any kind of rate I should remind includes some measure of time. Real particles in relativity with a mass constitute as clocks.

    The mass flow rate of an arbitrary system is given as

    \(\dot{M} = \frac{\Delta M}{\Delta t}\)

    Therefor \(\dot{\chi}\) if \(\chi\) spreads out over all space results in a mass flow rate which it's end history and future boundary represent the overall density of the universe. When I speak of density, I mean the energy density. The part

    \((\frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial \dot{q_i}} \cdot d)\)

    describes a set of dimensions satisfying momentum times the distance. This is equivalent to the reduced Plancks Constant. But we cannot infer on that because our field should not be quantized.

    The \(\dot{\chi}\) part is really just \(\frac{\partial \chi}{\partial t}\) thus what we end up with is the Canonical Momentum multiplied by the distance which provides the action of the system.
     
  20. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    Well, just google Zero point Energy on wiki, that article will tell you everything you need to know about his influence, including references.
     
  21. wlminex Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,587
    THANKS, Reiku . . . . will do!
     
  22. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238

    In fact, looking back at my notes, I should have also said that there is a time-coupling parameter on the matter field and the lagrangian through a proportionality. The time dependant therego arises from \(\dot{\chi}\) through periodic apperances of \(\frac{\partial \mathcal{L}}{\partial \dot{q}_i}\). The kinetic energy is therefor dependant on the periodic cycles of the overall field \(\chi\).
     
  23. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    ''So, at least at the quantum level . . . certain conservation 'LAWS' CAN be violated . . . ''

    Yes, this is what happens when you quantize a metric. Cause and effect become unclear.
     

Share This Page