Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Originally posted by LewisWildermuth
I'm willing to wait.
Now get the book, show me the quote, prove to me and all the others here that you are not a liar.
Where is this vacuum that starts off completely empty and is later observed to contain virtual particles?
That is very simple. Where is it? What lab is it in?
Yes, I say he says what I originally posted. I have always stood behind that, and it is a fact. Look it up for yourselves.
It's on page 133 of the Bantam paperback edition, in the middle of Chapter 8 in a paragraph that begins "The idea of inflation could also explain why there is so much matter in the universe."
Hawking never says, as Souljah claims, "we don't have to explain where energy comes from." Hawking explains why the total energy of the universe is zero. Broadly speaking Hawking says that, according to quantum theory, the matter in the universe is positive energy, whereas the gravitational field is negative energy. Assuming an approximately uniform universe, negative gravitational energy, which increases dependent upon the distance between particles, "exactly cancels the positive energy represented by the matter."
But I don't see where Hawking claims "we don't have to explain where energy comes from." Maybe this statement was revealed by exegesis.
Where did [all the particles in the observable universe] come from? The answer is that, in quantum theory, particles can be created out of energy in the form of particle/antiparticle pairs. But that just raises the question of where did the energy come from. The answer is that the total energy of the universe is zero.
Originally posted by Morat
Here's that chapter online.
The answer is that the total energy of the universe is zero.
So what's your point? That no one bothered to build a hugely expensive vacuum chamber, as well as come up with some way to directly observe what cannot be directly observed, given that the Casimir and Lamb effects showed the existance of the quantum vacuum and virtual particles decades ago?
The answer is that the total energy of the universe is zero.
There it is, right there. The answer to where energy came from is that there is zero total energy. That is what I was refering to when I asked the question.
I was reading "A Brief History of Time" last week, and came across Hawking's statement that we don't have to explain where energy came from, because there is both negative energy and positive energy, that exist in equal amounts, and so the sum of energy is zero.
My point is that it isn't possible to build an <B>empty</B> vacuum. Its pretty simple.
Your comments about the price, or the fact that virtual particles have to be indirectly observed if beside the fact.
The fact is that it can't be built, admit it.
Originally posted by D. Scarlatti
Is this the same Souljah that started a thread called "Is Stephen Hawking Really This Stupid" accompanied by a "thumbs down" icon?
Simply what I said. That is his answer. He apparently doesn't think that any further explanation is required.
Originally posted by Morat
Sure, if you try, you find it filled with virtual particles. Isn't that the point?
Originally posted by s0uljah
From the book...here I will bold for you:
"But that just raises the question of where the energy came from. The answer is that the total energy of the universe is exactly zero."
Simply what I said. That is his answer. He apparently doesn't think that any further explanation is required.
Who is a liar Lewis?
Originally posted by LewisWildermuth
And where in that sentance did you find that no further explanation was needed?
So far you seem to be the liar.
Did you stop reading the chapter at the line, or something? The rest of the chapter is further explanation
Which are the result of energy in the vacuum. You think that a third particle time travels to give the first virtual particle pair its energy.
No it isn't, it is simply more speculation.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?