It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Gravity has negative potential energy, but it's debatable whether that equates to the actual negative energy required to produce a zero-energy universe. I'm more inclined to believe that dark energy is what supplies the negative energy because dark energy exerts a negative pressure on space and causes the universe to expand as if it was negative matter.
Let me say it simple as possible. If I see something that is not confirming my theory, I let the theory go and look for a better one. What scientists do, is adding more and more unknowns into the equation instead of rethinking it
Astyanax
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
Dark energy is not negative energy. Gravity is negative energy.
Oh, and the OP said:
I'm stating that a Zero state of energy within the universe is impossible. As in NOTHINGNESS is impossible...
Agreed that pure nothing cannot exist; but science recognises this. And the total energy of the universe is zero.
Zero-energy universe
edit on 13/1/14 by Astyanax because: of zero.
When you add energy to matter, the space between atoms increases. With dark energy, the space itself inflates. Both are positive.
Gravity causes the space between atoms to contract. That's negative energy. Very simple; end of story.
This negative energy can balance the positive energy needed to create matter, but it’s not quite that simple. The negative gravitational energy of the earth, for example, is less than a billionth of the positive energy of the matter particles the earth is made of.
en.wikipedia.org...
Panic2k11
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
In absolute terms zero does not exists, there is always something present, even time and space or if you go back to the 0 apples our understanding is that in a parallel universe apples did fall, but that is complicating the subject. If we look at the absence of something as not 0 but simply a non-realization of a potential in our observed reality. For instance one can say that no apples did fall but the apples are still there. That is basically what is defended when the discussion goes to the destruction of information in black holes.
Like 0 in reality there aren't negative numbers, they are an abstraction and any applicability to reality is only valid in regards to abstract scales. This also lead to the unreality of infinite in physical terms, there is nothing infinite, but on the human super large scales can escape enumeration. Of course this can be complicated like stating that one can for instance trace an infinite line on the surface of a sphere or trace the contour of a circle but that can only be possible in a reduced reality (since components process can't exist in infinity, for starts one would run out of ink/pencil etc or in the extreme entropy would win a the universe would have ended).
ChaoticOrder
reply to post by Panic2k11
Like 0 in reality there aren't negative numbers, they are an abstraction and any applicability to reality is only valid in regards to abstract scales. This also lead to the unreality of infinite in physical terms, there is nothing infinite, but on the human super large scales can escape enumeration.
Without negativity energy we cannot have a zero-energy universe, and it's obvious that a zero-energy universe is the only logical explanation for why we have something rather than nothing in the first place. And if we do live in a zero-energy universe it means that space-time is infinite and flat. There is a lot of good evidence to indicate the universe is infinite and flat, that's why it's the most prevalent model accepted among physicists now.edit on 13/1/2014 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)
Why is it obvious a zero energy universe is the only logical explanation for why we have something rather then nothing?
Can you describe what a non zero energy universe would be like?
Time is infinite.
ChaoticOrder
reply to post by ImaFungi
Why is it obvious a zero energy universe is the only logical explanation for why we have something rather then nothing?
Because it allows for a conservation of energy during the big bang period. If there is an equal amount of negative energy to balance out the positive energy then the laws of energy conservation are not being broken. If only positive energy was created during the big bang it's very difficult to explain how that energy was able to appear from nothing. A zero-energy universe solves that problem and allows energy to appear from nothing without violating any laws of physics.
Can you describe what a non zero energy universe would be like?
Well for a start the energy of the universe would cause space to be curved since there would be no negative energy to balance it out and flatten space-time out. And if it was curved that also means the universe would be finite because space-time would eventually curve back in on its self. So it means we would be living in a curved finite universe and not a flat infinite universe. We may live in a curved universe but I highly doubt it.
projectbane
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
It seems you about the only one on here who has some real knowledge. It should of been you writing this thread. Not the current OP!!
I can not say if what you are saying is correct (lack of knowledge on this subject matter) but I do like reading your posts here!
Korg Trinity
projectbane
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
It seems you about the only one on here who has some real knowledge. It should of been you writing this thread. Not the current OP!!
I can not say if what you are saying is correct (lack of knowledge on this subject matter) but I do like reading your posts here!
Yet another insulting comment...
Both ChaoticOrder and myself concur on many aspects of this theory, and I might add have done so many times previously in many other threads, yet you discredit me at every possible juncture.
Either contribute to the thread content or shut the hell up!
Korg.
projectbane
Korg Trinity
projectbane
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
It seems you about the only one on here who has some real knowledge. It should of been you writing this thread. Not the current OP!!
I can not say if what you are saying is correct (lack of knowledge on this subject matter) but I do like reading your posts here!
Yet another insulting comment...
Both ChaoticOrder and myself concur on many aspects of this theory, and I might add have done so many times previously in many other threads, yet you discredit me at every possible juncture.
Either contribute to the thread content or shut the hell up!
Korg.
was not meant as an insult, just an opinion by a layman. The way chaosorder explains things and actually goes into detail in their posts is proof that they have some prior knowledge. Those who continuously write one or two line nonsense, too me anyway seem like they could be googling their limited answers.
Don't you offer up some papers you wrote or something to that effect? Patiently waiting to see. Always waiting.
May i ask what is taking so long? If they have already been written surely it can not be that hard to provide them?
ChaoticOrder
"When you add energy to matter, the space between atoms increases. With dark energy, the space itself inflates. Both are positive."
That is a completely invalid comparison for a start. Negative matter (assuming it could exist) would produce negative gravity and cause space to expand exactly like dark energy does. The whole idea that dark energy is a positive energy exerting a negative pressure is dependent on certain theories concerning vacuum energy but doesn't apply if we consider dark energy to actually be a form of negative matter.
ChaoticOrder
Because it allows for a conservation of energy during the big bang period. If there is an equal amount of negative energy to balance out the positive energy then the laws of energy conservation are not being broken. If only positive energy was created during the big bang it's very difficult to explain how that energy was able to appear from nothing. A zero-energy universe solves that problem and allows energy to appear from nothing without violating any laws of physics.
Panic2k11
reply to post by ImaFungi
Time is infinite.
No it isn't time time-space is relativistic dimensional scale.edit on 14-1-2014 by Panic2k11 because: (no reason given)
ImaFungi
Panic2k11
reply to post by ImaFungi
Time is infinite.
No it isn't time time-space is relativistic dimensional scale.edit on 14-1-2014 by Panic2k11 because: (no reason given)
Time never began and will never end. Time is infinite.
ImaFungi
ChaoticOrder
Because it allows for a conservation of energy during the big bang period. If there is an equal amount of negative energy to balance out the positive energy then the laws of energy conservation are not being broken. If only positive energy was created during the big bang it's very difficult to explain how that energy was able to appear from nothing. A zero-energy universe solves that problem and allows energy to appear from nothing without violating any laws of physics.
It is impossible to explain how energy appeared from nothing. Impossible, wrong! If you think something came from nothing you are wrong.