Cosmology insanity

On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 02:48:21 -0400, bwhiting wrote:

look at it this way, and I realize I am trying to be practical
but not necessarily scientific. We know that the vaccuum has
an awful lot of 'potential' energy; in science class, have you
ever seen the two iron hemi-spheres placed together, then the
air removed from them with an air pump? 4 sets of horses on
each end cannot pull the two hemispheres apart with a vacuum inside
them. Kind of proving here that a perfect vaccuum must have a lot
of potential energy.

No, it doesn't. This is just a measure of air pressure. The "vacuum" referred to
in cosmology really has nothing to do with our usage of the word, meaning
basically an absence of matter. In the cosmological sense, vacuum is referring
to the structure of space-time itself. It is not the absence of particles: at a
small scale, we are surrounded by this vacuum, and it matters not in the least
that we are in an atmosphere.

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

Good point Bryan, and you are right...it is really air pressure
on the outside...but I was (and you are thinking) of a 'closed'
system.....I was simply trying to use that analogy, but was really
thinking of an "open system" of a Perfect Void....wide open system.

And that hypothesis also explains why the Universe is accelerating
its expansion...for a while, the first 5, 6 billion years ABB, with a
smaller Universe, matter (gravity) was able to overcome some of the
'outside' vaccuum sucking, thus we decelerated our expansion...but now,
the Universe is so large, and the gravity so weak (stretched out), that
we have resumed our acceleration outward. And will continue to do so
at an ever increasing rate. (According to my mind's view of it).
We've past the point of no return. (A big crunch collapse).

The Perfect Void vaccuum is 'sucking' out the
known visible Universe at a faster and faster rate as we are surrounded
by it....its also the "what" that we (our Universe) are expanding into.
Thus, there is no need to invoke a 'dark energy'...anti-gravity stuff,
scenerio. Remember Occam's Razor?
FWIW,
Clear Skies,
Tom W.






wrote:
bwhiting wrote:

hey Toast,
look at it this way, and I realize I am trying to be practical
but not necessarily scientific. We know that the vaccuum has
an awful lot of 'potential' energy; in science class, have you
ever seen the two iron hemi-spheres placed together, then the
air removed from them with an air pump? 4 sets of horses on
each end cannot pull the two hemispheres apart with a vacuum inside
them. Kind of proving here that a perfect vaccuum must have a lot
of potential energy.


Sorry, but the vacuum itself has no potential energy. It's potential is
zero, it is the air pressure outside (i.e. at a higher potential) that
produces the potential energy. The PE level is [Patm-Pvac(=0)]*volume.
The force capacity is only one element of the potential energy. One could
generate the same force with almost zero potenital energy (e.g. two nearly
flat disks with a good edge seal). Take your vacuum sphere into space and
it couldn't stop a fly (assuming a fly could fly in space) ;-)

Bryan



So, picture a Perfect Void which existed prior to the Big Bang, loaded
with lots of potential energy....this Void was not the normal
space-time continuum that we live in today....it was a Perfect Vacuum.


(Our normal space today is not a perfect vaccuum...radio waves,
neutrino's flitting about, x-rays, gamma rays, hydrogen atoms, dust, etc)


And in my mind, it was an unstable Perfect Vaccuum, needing only the
slightest quantum fluctuation on the sub-microscopic level,
to unleash all that potential energy.
We have no idea what the 'structure' of this Perfect Void was, but
somehow, evidently, a major quantum fluctuation occurred that released
all that pent up energy from the Perfect Void, and that quantum
fluctuation, or the results of it, we call the Big Bang.
So in this humble layman's view, you are not really getting something
from nothing, you are simply converting potential energy to kinetic energy.
Lots of it.
Clear Skies,
Tom Whiting






Powdered Toast Man wrote:

What gives the Universe all the room to have enormous (or infinite)
space? It had to come from somewhere! What is the origin of
all the matter/energy in the universe? It had to come from
somewhere! If the universe has infinite size, does it also
have infinite energy? What created that?

Good grief, I know these are fundamental problems of cosmology but
it still drives me absolutely insane. I have a few cosmology books
here in the house, but they seem to tiptoe around a lot of these
issues and delve into other stuff, such as redshift and different
rehashes of what happened in the first second of the Big Bang.
I guess it wouldn't be proper for these books to speculate,
which is understandable, but I'd at least like to read an
inkling of speculation.

The idea of ANYTHING growing out of an absolute vacuum, no
matter what the circumstances are, is so counterintuitive it
is insane. The Universe shouldn't even exist! Aghh!!
More fodder to contemplate during my next observing night.

PTM

But there is such a thing as vacuum energy, because of
the constant creation and annihilation of virtual
particle-antiparticle pairs. Quantum mechanics
predicts this, and it has been observed experimentally.

wrote in message
...
bwhiting wrote:
hey Toast,
look at it this way, and I realize I am trying to be practical
but not necessarily scientific. We know that the vaccuum has
an awful lot of 'potential' energy; in science class, have you
ever seen the two iron hemi-spheres placed together, then the
air removed from them with an air pump? 4 sets of horses on
each end cannot pull the two hemispheres apart with a vacuum inside
them. Kind of proving here that a perfect vaccuum must have a lot
of potential energy.

Sorry, but the vacuum itself has no potential energy. It's potential is
zero, it is the air pressure outside (i.e. at a higher potential) that
produces the potential energy. The PE level is [Patm-Pvac(=0)]*volume.
The force capacity is only one element of the potential energy. One could
generate the same force with almost zero potenital energy (e.g. two nearly
flat disks with a good edge seal). Take your vacuum sphere into space and
it couldn't stop a fly (assuming a fly could fly in space) ;-)

Bryan
I think he is talking about 'zero point energy', which _is_ 'potentially'
there in a vacuum. There is talk of including a device to see if the energy
can be extracted on a future space flight. Have a look at:
http://sis.bris.ac.uk/~ot8234/casimi...mir_effect.htm

Best Wishes

So, picture a Perfect Void which existed prior to the Big Bang, loaded
with lots of potential energy....this Void was not the normal
space-time continuum that we live in today....it was a Perfect Vacuum.

(Our normal space today is not a perfect vaccuum...radio waves,
neutrino's flitting about, x-rays, gamma rays, hydrogen atoms, dust,
etc)

And in my mind, it was an unstable Perfect Vaccuum, needing only the
slightest quantum fluctuation on the sub-microscopic level,
to unleash all that potential energy.
We have no idea what the 'structure' of this Perfect Void was, but
somehow, evidently, a major quantum fluctuation occurred that released
all that pent up energy from the Perfect Void, and that quantum
fluctuation, or the results of it, we call the Big Bang.
So in this humble layman's view, you are not really getting something
from nothing, you are simply converting potential energy to kinetic
energy.
Lots of it.
Clear Skies,
Tom Whiting





Powdered Toast Man wrote:
What gives the Universe all the room to have enormous (or infinite)
space? It had to come from somewhere! What is the origin of
all the matter/energy in the universe? It had to come from
somewhere! If the universe has infinite size, does it also
have infinite energy? What created that?

Good grief, I know these are fundamental problems of cosmology but
it still drives me absolutely insane. I have a few cosmology books
here in the house, but they seem to tiptoe around a lot of these
issues and delve into other stuff, such as redshift and different
rehashes of what happened in the first second of the Big Bang.
I guess it wouldn't be proper for these books to speculate,
which is understandable, but I'd at least like to read an
inkling of speculation.

The idea of ANYTHING growing out of an absolute vacuum, no
matter what the circumstances are, is so counterintuitive it
is insane. The Universe shouldn't even exist! Aghh!!
More fodder to contemplate during my next observing night.

PTM

Yes, well, call it what you want, Roger.
The mental picture I conceive of the Perfect
Void, that undetermined as yet, 'thing' or
huge region, that existed prior to the BB,
in my mind, HAD to have lots of potential
energy in some form...probably not determinable.
(So thus this is not 'scientific' because it
is not up for data collection, nor is it duplicatable).


It may not even be 'scientifically accurate' BUT.....
It (my theory) just keeps me from 'going crazy'
like Powdered Toast suggested. And I was just trying
to 'save' him from the same fate.
Clear Skies,
Tom W.

bwhiting wrote:

hey Toast,
look at it this way, and I realize I am trying to be practical
but not necessarily scientific. We know that the vaccuum has
an awful lot of 'potential' energy; in science class, have you
ever seen the two iron hemi-spheres placed together, then the
air removed from them with an air pump?

That's the pressure of air on the Earth, not vacuum energy!

Genz, H. Nothingness: The Science of Empty Space. 1998.
Lafferty, J. M. (Ed.). Foundations of Vacuum Science and Technology. New York: Wiley, 1998.
Redhead, P. A. (Ed.). Vacuum Science and Technology: Pioneers of the 20th Century. AIP, 1993

Yes, I know Sam....I was simply trying to use an
analogy of a closed system to explain the potential vacuum
energy of an open system...the closest analogy I
could think of on the spot.
And I was referring to the first micro-second Prior
to the BB, not the first micro-second after BB....
All very unscientific, of course.
But that particular mental picture saves my 'sanity'
even IF its scientifically, the wrong picture!
(Actually, we really don't know the conditions prior
to the BB do we, so no one can claim that I'm wrong)! :-)
That alone gets me 'off the hook'.
Clear Skies,
Tom W.



Sam Wormley wrote:
bwhiting wrote:

hey Toast,
look at it this way, and I realize I am trying to be practical
but not necessarily scientific. We know that the vaccuum has
an awful lot of 'potential' energy; in science class, have you
ever seen the two iron hemi-spheres placed together, then the
air removed from them with an air pump?


That's the pressure of air on the Earth, not vacuum energy!

Genz, H. Nothingness: The Science of Empty Space. 1998.
Lafferty, J. M. (Ed.). Foundations of Vacuum Science and Technology. New York: Wiley, 1998.
Redhead, P. A. (Ed.). Vacuum Science and Technology: Pioneers of the 20th Century. AIP, 1993

Powdered Toast Man wrote:

What gives the Universe all the room to have enormous (or infinite)
space? It had to come from somewhere! What is the origin of
all the matter/energy in the universe? It had to come from
somewhere! If the universe has infinite size, does it also
have infinite energy? What created that?

Good grief, I know these are fundamental problems of cosmology but
it still drives me absolutely insane. I have a few cosmology books
here in the house, but they seem to tiptoe around a lot of these
issues and delve into other stuff, such as redshift and different
rehashes of what happened in the first second of the Big Bang.
I guess it wouldn't be proper for these books to speculate,
which is understandable, but I'd at least like to read an
inkling of speculation.

The idea of ANYTHING growing out of an absolute vacuum, no
matter what the circumstances are, is so counterintuitive it
is insane. The Universe shouldn't even exist! Aghh!!
More fodder to contemplate during my next observing night.


Here is some of what we do know abouth the ultimate free lunch
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm

bwhiting wrote in message ...
And that hypothesis also explains why the Universe is accelerating
its expansion...for a while, the first 5, 6 billion years ABB, with a
smaller Universe, matter (gravity) was able to overcome some of the
'outside' vaccuum sucking,

What "outside"?

thus we decelerated our expansion...but now,
the Universe is so large, and the gravity so weak (stretched out), that
we have resumed our acceleration outward. And will continue to do so
at an ever increasing rate. (According to my mind's view of it).

Your mind might need to revise its view if i read your perception of
the universe correctly.

The Perfect Void vaccuum is 'sucking' out the
known visible Universe

Vacuums do not suck. Sucking is the action of outside pressure
pushing matter into a place--the vacuum--that has no matter to push
back. When you drink through a soda straw, you are witnessing 15lb/sq
in. pushing liquid into your mouth.

at a faster and faster rate as we are surrounded
by it....its also the "what" that we (our Universe) are expanding into.

Confirmed--your mind definitely needs to revise its view.

Thus, there is no need to invoke a 'dark energy'...anti-gravity stuff,
scenerio. Remember Occam's Razor?

Occam's Razor only works among explanations that fit the observations.
Don't worry--you're not alone in your total misconception of the BB.
As someone else explained, it's not intuitive--and i might add, nature
is under no obligation to conform to our intuitions. Just ask the
people who discovered the universe's acceleration!

What may be even more counterintuitive is that a vacuum is *not*
nothingness. This leaves the door wide open for mind-bending ideas
like "dark energy." But enough headaches for one afternoon.


Clear skies!
--
------------------- Richard Callwood III --------------------
~ U.S. Virgin Islands ~ USDA zone 11 ~ 18.3N, 64.9W ~
~ eastern Massachusetts ~ USDA zone 6 (1992-95) ~
--------------- http://cac.uvi.edu/staff/rc3/ ---------------

On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 18:26:04 -0400, bwhiting wrote:

The 'outside' that I am mentally visualing....

You may as well mentally visualize purple-toed unicorns (a favorite of Brian
Tung g) because they have the same possibility of existence. It does seem very
likely that if there is an "outside" to the Universe, it has a very different
meaning than say, "outside" your house.


In fact, current science states that we can never know about these
distant regions anyway.

It does not state that at all. It states that there are regions of the Universe
beyond our ability to see, or ever receive information from. But there is
nothing that precludes our developing a deep understanding of the nature and
formation of the Universe, and therefore knowing with near complete certainty
what parts we can't see are like.


And I think Occam's razor is valid for anything, anytime,
although it is generally reserved for real scientific questions.

Occam's razor falls apart if you don't have the knowledge to determine what
constitutes simple, possible solutions. At the small end of things, quantum
mechanics is a good example. Someone who doesn't understand the basis of the
peculiar, non-intuitive behavior of things at that scale will fail completely if
he tries to use Occam's razor. It seems that the same problem exists for the
Universe at a large scale.

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com