Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
What did it all started with?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="sjastro" data-source="post: 75932883" data-attributes="member: 352921"><p>Your use of the term "We ARE ignorant" should read "I am ignorant".</p><p>Your level of ignorance is not the standard by which one evaluates science.</p><p></p><p>As an example your are ignorant about the term 'nothingness' and how it has a very different meaning in science and how the scientific theory of 'nothingness' has been confirmed by experiment.</p><p></p><p>The concept of nothing is very much tied in with the modern or non classical version of a vacuum which is a quantum field in the lowest energy level.</p><p>You can’t divorce a field from nothingness or a vacuum.</p><p></p><p>This idea comes from a seemingly unrelated topic in classical physics the Simple Harmonic Oscillator (SHO).</p><p>An example of a SHO is a weight attached to a spring.</p><p>Pulling down on the weight and letting it go results in oscillation.</p><p></p><p>The Hamiltonian or total energy H of the SHO is defined as;</p><p></p><p><img src="http://members.iinet.net.au/~sjastro/astrophysics/Energy/a.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p>The first term on the right is the kinetic energy for the SHO in terms of the momentum p.</p><p>The second term is the potential energy stored in the spring with frequency ω and displacement x.</p><p></p><p>In early to mid 20th century scientists came up with Quantum Field Theory (QFT) where the field can be quantized like the energy levels associated with scalar particles such as electrons in atoms.</p><p></p><p>Each point in spacetime is defined by a SHO.</p><p>In this case the quanta of the field are the scalar particles which can be destroyed and created by annihilation and creation mathematical operators defined as follows.</p><p></p><p><img src="http://members.iinet.net.au/~sjastro/astrophysics/Energy/b.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p>Expressing the Hamiltonian for the SHO in terms of the creation and annihilation operators gives;</p><p></p><p><img src="http://members.iinet.net.au/~sjastro/astrophysics/Energy/d.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p>Where N is the number operator is defined as;</p><p></p><p><img src="http://members.iinet.net.au/~sjastro/astrophysics/Energy/c.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p>The state |n > is not the state of a single particle but is the state of the field with n particles or quanta present.</p><p>The eigenstates of the Hamiltonian for the field are of the form.</p><p></p><p><img src="http://members.iinet.net.au/~sjastro/astrophysics/Energy/g.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p>which is analogous to the quantum mechanical equation for a single particle.</p><p></p><p><img src="http://members.iinet.net.au/~sjastro/astrophysics/Energy/e.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p>Here the energy levels for the field are;</p><p></p><p><img src="http://members.iinet.net.au/~sjastro/astrophysics/Energy/h.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p>The lowest energy state occurs when n=0 and E = ħω/2 ≠ 0 where there are no particles or quanta which defines the vacuum.</p><p>Hence spacetime or a vacuum can never be totally empty and is supported by experiment such as the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casimir_effect" target="_blank">Casimir effect</a>.</p><p>In fact you can get something from “nothing” as the “nothing” in this case is not totally empty.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="sjastro, post: 75932883, member: 352921"] Your use of the term "We ARE ignorant" should read "I am ignorant". Your level of ignorance is not the standard by which one evaluates science. As an example your are ignorant about the term 'nothingness' and how it has a very different meaning in science and how the scientific theory of 'nothingness' has been confirmed by experiment. The concept of nothing is very much tied in with the modern or non classical version of a vacuum which is a quantum field in the lowest energy level. You can’t divorce a field from nothingness or a vacuum. This idea comes from a seemingly unrelated topic in classical physics the Simple Harmonic Oscillator (SHO). An example of a SHO is a weight attached to a spring. Pulling down on the weight and letting it go results in oscillation. The Hamiltonian or total energy H of the SHO is defined as; [IMG]http://members.iinet.net.au/~sjastro/astrophysics/Energy/a.jpg[/IMG] The first term on the right is the kinetic energy for the SHO in terms of the momentum p. The second term is the potential energy stored in the spring with frequency ω and displacement x. In early to mid 20th century scientists came up with Quantum Field Theory (QFT) where the field can be quantized like the energy levels associated with scalar particles such as electrons in atoms. Each point in spacetime is defined by a SHO. In this case the quanta of the field are the scalar particles which can be destroyed and created by annihilation and creation mathematical operators defined as follows. [IMG]http://members.iinet.net.au/~sjastro/astrophysics/Energy/b.jpg[/IMG] Expressing the Hamiltonian for the SHO in terms of the creation and annihilation operators gives; [IMG]http://members.iinet.net.au/~sjastro/astrophysics/Energy/d.jpg[/IMG] Where N is the number operator is defined as; [IMG]http://members.iinet.net.au/~sjastro/astrophysics/Energy/c.jpg[/IMG] The state |n > is not the state of a single particle but is the state of the field with n particles or quanta present. The eigenstates of the Hamiltonian for the field are of the form. [IMG]http://members.iinet.net.au/~sjastro/astrophysics/Energy/g.jpg[/IMG] which is analogous to the quantum mechanical equation for a single particle. [IMG]http://members.iinet.net.au/~sjastro/astrophysics/Energy/e.jpg[/IMG] Here the energy levels for the field are; [IMG]http://members.iinet.net.au/~sjastro/astrophysics/Energy/h.jpg[/IMG] The lowest energy state occurs when n=0 and E = ħω/2 ≠ 0 where there are no particles or quanta which defines the vacuum. Hence spacetime or a vacuum can never be totally empty and is supported by experiment such as the [URL='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casimir_effect']Casimir effect[/URL]. In fact you can get something from “nothing” as the “nothing” in this case is not totally empty. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
What did it all started with?
Top
Bottom