The big bang, something from nothing?

[joelr]

Can photons pass through a total void ?
Can photons even exist in a total void ?
Given that void of nothingness,
from where'd the photons come ?
What can be made from a total nothingness ?
Isn't the original singularity surrounded by the `void`,
what is forming the inertia to propel the photons ?
What is the `gravity` of a void of nothingness ?
What in turn provides the momentum of the photons ?
And on and on and on...
NuffStuff

If by total void you mean we take away space-time and take away all of the quantum fields (which might be the same thing, we don't know yet) then no, you could not have any photons or gravity as they are all just excitations of the quantum field.
All of our physics would not likely work in a void like that meaning if we were teleported to a void universe we would vanish or explode into energy. Could energy even move through a void? There would be no time so you would be frozen in 1 spot in time.
You need spacetime to have time.

 

[`mud]

And there is more chalk on invisible blackboards !
There's only one answer to the perpetual question,
there was never such thing as a `void` !
Now...from where'd the photon come ?
And of course, it's inertia ?
The true cause, please ?

 

[ChristineM]

What is spiraling is the math, which means we can't get a mathematical description that makes sense.
A quanta of elctromagnetism/light is a photon. They have mathematical properties in how they interact with electrons (QED) and they do not interact with each other.

The hypothetical particle of gravity - graviton would be a particle that attracts other particles to itself. But gravitons also attract other gravitons and they exist everywhere in spacetime.
This makes an attraction from both particles. It also can show there should be self attraction and all of the equations end up giving infinite answers (spiraling to infinity) as if gravity was an infinite force. Not what we experience and the normal procedure of cancelling out infinities in physics called renormalization doesn't work. Usually you take one infinity and use it to cancel a 2nd infinity. With infinite infinities you cannot get anywhere with the math that would describe a graviton and it's so unruly that physicists have been stuck for over 50 years.

I think it was professor Brian Cox who said something along the lines of, 'In mathematics infinities are a useful tool but in physics if you have to invoke infinity it means something has gone terribly wrong'

 

[gnostic]

If by total void you mean we take away space-time and take away all of the quantum fields (which might be the same thing, we don't know yet) then no, you could not have any photons or gravity as they are all just excitations of the quantum field.
All of our physics would not likely work in a void like that meaning if we were teleported to a void universe we would vanish or explode into energy. Could energy even move through a void? There would be no time so you would be frozen in 1 spot in time.
You need spacetime to have time.

If “void” means absolutely no matters, no masses, no particles and no fields (no waves), and as in absence of everything, then energy won’t exist too.

Let me rephrased the above with the following:

1. If there is no mass, then there is no energy.
2. If there is no particle, then there is no energy.
3. And if there is no field, then there is no energy.

Energy don’t exist on its own.

I think there are lot of people who believe in the supernatural, don’t really understand the concepts of energy. They have misconception of what energy is.

There are no such things as “Pure Energy” or “Absolute Energy” or “Ultimate Energy”, etc.

All these superfluous adjectives (eg “pure”, “ultimate”, “absolute”, “transcendent”, “super”, etc), are just nothing but pretentious woo.

 

[`mud]

hey Joelr,
You brought up approaching a `void`. If there was such a thing, wouldn't `gravity` prevent any entry ?
If you really get there, wouldn't gravity around you suck you back out again, into the singularity ?
If.....indeed the `singularity` ever existed, what form of container would be the format of construction ?
There aren't any matter, or energy, or plasma in that nothingness known as a `void`, are there ?
The `void` or `singularity` or `big bang` never did exist, the Cosmos is the only cause of infinity,
it has no `container`, it disolves itself, and of course renews itself again, forever and on to finality.
We will never discover that finality, and we will never really measure the Cosmos, will we ?
NuffStuff

 

[ChristineM]

If “void” means absolutely no matters, no masses, no particles and no fields (no waves), and as in absence of everything, then energy won’t exist too.

Let me rephrased the above with the following:

1. If there is no mass, then there is no energy.
2. If there is no particle, then there is no energy.
3. And if there is no field, then there is no energy.

Energy don’t exist on its own.

I think there are lot of people who believe in the supernatural, don’t really understand the concepts of energy. They have misconception of what energy is.

There are no such things as “Pure Energy” or “Absolute Energy” or “Ultimate Energy”, etc.

All these superfluous adjectives (eg “pure”, “ultimate”, “absolute”, “transcendent”, “super”, etc), are just nothing but pretentious woo.

Does an absolute void have dimensions? If so then surely
particles can pass through it.

 

[`mud]

Everyone keeps ignoring the container of the nothingness that is contained in the `void` !

 

[`mud]

There are no dimensions or distances in a `void` !
Nor is there any time or gravity, it is a `void` !
And `it` never existed !
Zero is a nothingness !

 

[Polymath257]

If “void” means absolutely no matters, no masses, no particles and no fields (no waves), and as in absence of everything, then energy won’t exist too.

Let me rephrased the above with the following:

1. If there is no mass, then there is no energy.
2. If there is no particle, then there is no energy.
3. And if there is no field, then there is no energy.

Energy don’t exist on its own.

I think there are lot of people who believe in the supernatural, don’t really understand the concepts of energy. They have misconception of what energy is.

There are no such things as “Pure Energy” or “Absolute Energy” or “Ultimate Energy”, etc.

All these superfluous adjectives (eg “pure”, “ultimate”, “absolute”, “transcendent”, “super”, etc), are just nothing but pretentious woo.

Does it have volume? Does it have duration?

 

[`mud]

What is `volume` in describing something that doesn't exist,
how large is nothingness ?
What is the `duration` of the absence of the silence from a vacant nothingness ?
Zero from zero is still zero, sans a container,
it's still a `void` that doesn't ever exist !

 

[gnostic]

Does an absolute void have dimensions? If so then surely
particles can pass through it.

Does it have volume? Does it have duration?

I don’t know, because I am not sure what joelr means by “total void”.

My reply to joelr, was regarding to joelr’s question on “energy”:

All of our physics would not likely work in a void like that meaning if we were teleported to a void universe we would vanish or explode into energy. Could energy even move through a void?

If the “total void” just mean absolutely NOTHINGNESS, as in no matters, particles, fields, then there would be no energy.

My reply is only concerned with nothingness scenario, which I don’t think actually exist.

But I am still not sure what he (or she) meant by “total void”.

But if joelr was only talking about “void” as out in “deep space” or “empty space”, in somewhere in the universe than it isn’t “absolute nothingness”, because there are always something in the universe, like particles (eg photons, neutrinos, etc) or fields propagating through spacetime. If this scenario is true, then yes, particles would pass through the empty space.

It depends on what joelr really mean by “total void”.

The void-nothingness scenario don’t exist, but void-empty-space scenario do exist.

 

[gnostic]

I don’t think think there was ever a time when nothingness-type void ever existing. This nothingness scenario is merely a make-believe fantasy in philosophy and religion.

Our universe have never been “nothingness”, not even before the Big Bang. There is no nothingness, not even in the primordial singularity.

What astronomers perceive as “empty space”, is just that “empty space”, but if photons or fields exist, then that empty space won’t be “empty” anymore once photons pass through or the fields propagate through.

And if dark matters or dark energy exist in space, then the space isn’t empty.

And if particle or field exist in that space, then energy will exist, because energy is one of properties of field or particle.

 

[joelr]

I think it was professor Brian Cox who said something along the lines of, 'In mathematics infinities are a useful tool but in physics if you have to invoke infinity it means something has gone terribly wrong'

Yes, in this case it means gravity is infinitely strong, which it isn't so that's a problem.

 

[joelr]

If “void” means absolutely no matters, no masses, no particles and no fields (no waves), and as in absence of everything, then energy won’t exist too.

Let me rephrased the above with the following:

1. If there is no mass, then there is no energy.
2. If there is no particle, then there is no energy.
3. And if there is no field, then there is no energy.

Energy don’t exist on its own.

I think there are lot of people who believe in the supernatural, don’t really understand the concepts of energy. They have misconception of what energy is.

There are no such things as “Pure Energy” or “Absolute Energy” or “Ultimate Energy”, etc.

All these superfluous adjectives (eg “pure”, “ultimate”, “absolute”, “transcendent”, “super”, etc), are just nothing but pretentious woo.

Yeah forget all the supernatural stuff for a second.
Mass and energy are equivalent (E=MC2) you can have energy without mass like a massless particle of light, a photon which has momentum energy.

You don't need a particle to have energy because energy transforms into various forms like potential energy or momentum energy and gravitational energy may or may not have a particle associated.

With quantum fields when you add energy you get a particle. What are the fields made of? Who knows?
There isn't really "pure" energy. Energy transforms into different types but the amount stays the same.
Some times people call light pure energy but light has heat energy and momentum energy it isnt' pure energy.
Beyond that energy is a bit of a mystery as to what it really is. according to Richard Feynman in Six Easy Pieces.

 

[joelr]

hey Joelr,
You brought up approaching a `void`. If there was such a thing, wouldn't `gravity` prevent any entry ?
If you really get there, wouldn't gravity around you suck you back out again, into the singularity ?
If.....indeed the `singularity` ever existed, what form of container would be the format of construction ?
There aren't any matter, or energy, or plasma in that nothingness known as a `void`, are there ?
The `void` or `singularity` or `big bang` never did exist, the Cosmos is the only cause of infinity,
it has no `container`, it disolves itself, and of course renews itself again, forever and on to finality.
We will never discover that finality, and we will never really measure the Cosmos, will we ?
NuffStuff

I don't know. Gravity, space and time are all part of spacetime, without it it's hard to imagine what would be in it's place?
The universe could exist in a higher dimension, a 4th dimension of space?

The `void` or `singularity` or `big bang`are different things, singularity is the idea of a black hole or a universe compressed so small that gravity keeps sucking inward and creates infinite gravity. Might not exist, there might be something stopping gravity after a certain point.
Big bang is just the beginning of the universe, it was definitely compressed very small, smaller than an atom and then expanded. Not just energy but all spacetime expands as well.

Cosmology has many mysteries.

 

[ChristineM]

Yes, in this case it means gravity is infinitely strong, which it isn't so that's a problem.

But there is such a lot of it and no need for infinite strength, just close on infinite reach and that it has.

Considering it takes the gravity of a whole world to stop you floating away and luckily you reside on a world then what is the problem?

 

[Polymath257]

I don’t know, because I am not sure what joelr means by total void.

My reply to joelr, was regarding to joelr’s question on “energy”:



If the “total void” just mean absolutely NOTHINGNESS, as in no matters, particles, fields, then there would be no energy.

My reply is only concerned with nothingness scenario, which I don’t think actually exist.

But I am still not sure what he (or she) meant by “total void”.

But if joelr was only talking about “void” as out in “deep space” or “empty space”, in somewhere in the universe than it isn’t “absolute nothingness”, because there are always something in the universe, like particles (eg photons, neutrinos, etc) or fields propagating through spacetime. If this scenario is true, then yes, particles would pass through the empty space.

It depends on what joelr really mean by “total void”.

The void-nothingness scenario don’t exist, but void-empty-space scenario do exist.

One of the problems is that talking about a volume having no fields is impossible. The equations don't allow an identically zero solution (i.e, no field). There will *always* be a field whenever there is a volume. And, for that matter, a field for each fundamental particles.

Classical expectations do not apply.

 

[Polymath257]

Yeah forget all the supernatural stuff for a second.
Mass and energy are equivalent (E=MC2) you can have energy without mass like a massless particle of light, a photon which has momentum energy.

You don't need a particle to have energy because energy transforms into various forms like potential energy or momentum energy and gravitational energy may or may not have a particle associated.

This s is wrong. Energy doesn't appear without a particle: it is the time coordinate for the energy-momentum vector. You can have energy without *rest* mass, though (like a photon).

With quantum fields when you add energy you get a particle. What are the fields made of? Who knows?

Not quite correct. particles *are* excitation states of the fields. They are equivalent descriptions of the same phenomenon. And there is a lowest possible energy level for any field in any volume (corresponding to a lowest resonance for that volume). You *cannot* have a zero energy level---this is known as the zero-point energy.

There isn't really "pure" energy. Energy transforms into different types but the amount stays the same.

Technically, the energy gets transferred from one particle to another. Potential energy is the energy of whichever boson field is associated with the force.

Some times people call light pure energy but light has heat energy and momentum energy it isnt' pure energy.

Again, not quite accurate. Light has energy, momentum, spin, direction of travel, frequency (related to energy). And is made of particles (photons).

Beyond that energy is a bit of a mystery as to what it really is. according to Richard Feynman in Six Easy Pieces.

The same is true for all conserved quantities.

 

[`mud]

Oh, to travel for trillions of light years,
to be absorbed by a particle of matter !
How does it hold in all that energy !
What generates all that momentum ?
What generated all that inertia ?
The `holding` is the prime factor !

 

[gnostic]

With quantum fields when you add energy you get a particle.

What do you mean by “add energy”?

If the field exists, then the field already contains “energy”. And since field can exert force in the space that the field occupies, the energy of the field can be determined.

To “add energy” to field, it would seemed that you are saying some external forces are being applied to the quantum field, to “get a particle”.

Energy are already inherent in fields.

So what do you mean by “add energy” to the field?