The mathematics of hypothetical extraction of energy from the vacuum, page 6
Pages: <<  3    4    5    6  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 14 times


reply posted on 15-1-2012 @ 06:55 AM by playswithmachines
reply to post by pause4thought



Funneee
Best to ignore the C^2 part, and just see it as E=M.........



reply posted on 15-1-2012 @ 07:10 AM by zatara
Originally posted by CLPrime
reply to
post by Aletheia007



So, are you using the observed 6×10⁻¹º J/m³ or the theoretical 10¹¹³ J/m³? 'Cause there's a big difference. Personally, I'd think the observed value would be preferred.
edit on 17-12-2011 by CLPrime because: (no reason given)


How can these numbers be so hughly different..? Somebody definitely screwed up or doesn't know what he/she is talking about....

Sec.line.


reply posted on 20-1-2012 @ 02:47 PM by playswithmachines
reply to post by zatara



The numbers are hugely different because we always talk about observable energy & mass in the universe, hence the 'dark matter/dark energy' theory.
The math says there is a big difference between observed energy/mass & calculated energy/mass.
If you really boil down quantum mechanics to, say, the higgs field, it's saying there is a point (call it Zero) where particles can appear & disappear.
If you really boil down Aether theory, it says the same.
If you really boil down string theory, it says the same.

The problem is that each of these theories have a different explanation for how this mass/energy exchange works. The real answer could also be all three at once, the universe is that crazy.
edit on 20-1-2012 by playswithmachines because: never mind...
edit on 20-1-2012 by playswithmachines because: Typo's
edit on 20-1-2012 by playswithmachines because: (no reason given)

Pages: <<  3    4    5    6  >>    ^^TOP^^