legitimate questions about what energy is are not allowed...
yes that is the conventional view... but what is a field? Is a field Mass? (nope) Do you see the confusion?Energy is not a 'thing'. It is a property of matter and fields.
but what is a field? Is a field Mass?
from your link:No, I don't see any confusion.
The equal sign implied that they are equivalent, not that they are the same thing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_(physics)
ok ...then answering the question about the amount of energy propagating the universe at any given moment should cause no concern and be well published.Defining the field as "numbers in space" shouldn't detract from the idea that it has physical reality. “It occupies space. It contains energy. Its presence eliminates a true vacuum.”[2] The field creates a "condition in space"[3] such that when we put a particle in it, the particle "feels" a force.
ok ...then answering the question about the amount of energy propagating the universe at any given moment should cause no concern and be well published.
but as you have clearly stated "energy is a property of Matter and a "thing" called "fields"Energy is not a 'thing'. It is a property of matter and fields.
But one would have to rationally suggest that the amount of energy proposed to be in transit [ propagating ] would have to be a hugely significant value and one that appears to be ignored by mainstream science.I don't see how you can reach that conclusion. We certainly don't know all the different kinds of fields, in the universe, nor how much energy is contained by the fields. Nor, for that matter, how large the universe is.
In physical cosmology and astronomy, dark energy is a hypothetical form of energy that permeates all of space and tends to accelerate the expansion of the universe.[1] Dark energy is the most accepted hypothesis to explain observations since the 1990s that indicate that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate. According to the Planck mission team, and based on the standard model of cosmology, the total mass–energy of the universe contains 4.9% ordinary matter, dark matter and 68.3% dark energy
But one would have to rationally suggest that the amount of energy proposed to be in transit [ propagating ] would have to be a hugely significant value]
and one that appears to be ignored by mainstream science.
At present science appears to be suggesting that "Energy is a property of energy" And that it can exist independently of matter in the form of fields.
Why would you think that? Ignored how?
Is it possible that the 95.1% missing mass may be because this massive amount of propagating energy is not included in the calculations?In physical cosmology and astronomy, dark energy is a hypothetical form of energy that permeates all of space and tends to accelerate the expansion of the universe.[1] Dark energy is the most accepted hypothesis to explain observations since the 1990s that indicate that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate. According to the Planck mission team, and based on the standard model of cosmology, the total mass–energy of the universe contains 4.9% ordinary matter, dark matter and 68.3% dark energy
Simply because there is absolutely no reference to this massive amount of propagating energy on the net that I can find, nor any one else can find.
It appears to be non-existent.... yet it must exist according to science....re: photons, EMR etc etc
but do you agree that it would have to add up to a massive value? [ unknown perhaps but massive for sure ]Mainstream physics certainly doesn't ignore it, it's just unknown.
:shrug:but do you agree that it would have to add up to a massive value? [ unknown perhaps but massive for sure ]
:shrug:
How about zero?ok ...then answering the question about the amount of energy propagating the universe at any given moment should cause no concern and be well published.
Do you have a link that can provide an answer to this question?
Even an approximation would suffice.