Is Space a Void?

I have seen many references to space being/not being a void. What are the
current theories?

--
BenignVanilla
Pond Site: www.darofamily.com/jeff/links/mypond

On [GMT+0100=CET],
BenignVanilla thought hard and spewed:

I have seen many references to space being/not being a void. What are
the current theories?

Dark matter/energy.

"BenignVanilla" wrote in
:

I have seen many references to space being/not being a void. What are
the current theories?

Well, it is a fact that space is filthy with radiation, magnetic fields,
neutrinos and various other junk (some travelling at extremely high
speeds). It is also a theory that there is a certain amount of so called
"dark matter" and "dark energy" out there.


L.


--
BenignVanilla
Pond Site: www.darofamily.com/jeff/links/mypond

If by 'Void' you mean devoid of matter, even one Hydrogen atom per cubic
centimeter means that space is not void. Hydrogen has been found to be
ubiquitous in the visible universe; therefore, in this sense, space is not
void.

Another approach is that particle/antiparticle pair spontaneous
creation/annihilation is occurring everywhere; therefore, space is filled
with these 'virtual particles.'

Neal

"BenignVanilla" wrote in message
...
I have seen many references to space being/not being a void. What are the
current theories?

--
BenignVanilla
Pond Site: www.darofamily.com/jeff/links/mypond

Space is a vacuum because it contains less gas than a reference point, such
as the surface of the earth. But it is not a perfect vacuum: it still
contains atoms, albeit few. I would fill in the blank with ". . .at least
one atom per cubic centimeter." This would in the overwhelming majority of
cases be atomic hydrogen (not molecular, H2).

Does this help?

Neal

"BenignVanilla" wrote in message
...
"wb8pid" wrote in message
news:Z7gYa.7205$qf.1741@lakeread06...
If by 'Void' you mean devoid of matter, even one Hydrogen atom per cubic
centimeter means that space is not void. Hydrogen has been found to be
ubiquitous in the visible universe; therefore, in this sense, space is
not
void.

Another approach is that particle/antiparticle pair spontaneous
creation/annihilation is occurring everywhere; therefore, space is
filled
with these 'virtual particles.'
snip

I guess I am confused by void and vacuum. Space is a vacuum in that there
is
no air, but it is not empty as it contains __________?

BV.

"wb8pid" wrote in message
news:CJwYa.7355$qf.2391@lakeread06...
Space is a vacuum because it contains less gas than a reference point,
such
as the surface of the earth. But it is not a perfect vacuum: it still
contains atoms, albeit few. I would fill in the blank with ". . .at least
one atom per cubic centimeter." This would in the overwhelming majority
of
cases be atomic hydrogen (not molecular, H2).
snip

Yes, very much. I wonder then, if the toroid theory is correct. There are
areas of the universe that are more dense, and some that are more not-dense?

BV.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

wb8pid wrote:
| Another approach is that particle/antiparticle pair spontaneous
| creation/annihilation is occurring everywhere; therefore, space is
| filled with these 'virtual particles.'
As I recall, this is the method by which black holes can actually emit
particles. Anyway, dark energy, I think that it is as much a mistake
to assume it is just some random energy there (but we can't detect it)
as it was to assume a cosmological constant. Both only serve(d) to
balance our equations. Current theories dark energy include the
gravitational pull of another p-brane or perhaps the gravitational pull
of another part of our own brane, assuming it folds over itself. Dark
matter is not so hard to believe - it's simply all the matter that
_isn't_ giving off light (ie not a star or ionised plasma [nebula]).

- --Brandon Siegel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2-nr1 (Windows XP)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQE/MqqGVtFSfAZ1XPERAk/HAKDNYz793f6NegYhxKoF+qVMZCVm2ACfRkVV
cBvmILA+ogj/lrnastBzaVA=
=wz12
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

I don't think that that is what you're asking, but the answer is 'yes',
galaxies and components thereof are denser, and intergalactic space is less
dense. This seems to hold even out to the Great Wall galactic cluster. Of
course, this begs the question of how the primordial plasma of the Big Bang
developed anomalies within that led to the development of galaxies. . .

Neal

"BenignVanilla" wrote in message
...

"wb8pid" wrote in message
news:CJwYa.7355$qf.2391@lakeread06...
Space is a vacuum because it contains less gas than a reference point,
such
as the surface of the earth. But it is not a perfect vacuum: it still
contains atoms, albeit few. I would fill in the blank with ". . .at
least
one atom per cubic centimeter." This would in the overwhelming majority
of
cases be atomic hydrogen (not molecular, H2).
snip

Yes, very much. I wonder then, if the toroid theory is correct. There are
areas of the universe that are more dense, and some that are more
not-dense?

BV.

In article ,
says...

I guess I am confused by void and vacuum. Space is a vacuum in that there is
no air, but it is not empty as it contains __________?

BV.

Hi BV,
Void literally means 'nothing' that is completely unoccupied. For a long
time space was thought to be devoid of any particle material, this
however as we all know just isn't the case.

Vacuum may be defined as the complete emptyness of a given volume. It is
impossible to obtain a complete vacuum, however it is possible to obtain
a level of vacuum, defined as a pressure above absolute zero pressure.

Now for the fun stuff vbg

As other posters have pointed out, typical interstellar vacuum comprises
about 1 atom/molecule per cubic centimeter of volume. This might sound
like a lot, but it's not. Given that most cosmologists give the
interstellar regions a 50/50 mixture of atomic hydrogen (H2) and
molecular hydrogen molecules (H2) and neglecting for ease the other 1% of
interstellar material that isn't hydrogen based we can do a few simple
equations to show you just how hard the space vacuum really is.

At a 50/50 ratio of H to H2 hydrogen 1 mole of hydrogen material occupies
a volume of 397,320,000 cubic kilometers, or a cube with sides of
735.16km in length. (456.82 mile sides).

If however we made it pure atomic hydrogen the volume would be
602.000,000 cubic kilometers or a cube with 844.37km sides.

Hope this helps to explain how void the interstellar vacuum really is.

Ian

"BenignVanilla" wrote in message
...

"Ian W" wrote in message
. ..
snip
Void literally means 'nothing' that is completely unoccupied. For a long
time space was thought to be devoid of any particle material, this
however as we all know just isn't the case.

Vacuum may be defined as the complete emptyness of a given volume. It is
impossible to obtain a complete vacuum, however it is possible to obtain
a level of vacuum, defined as a pressure above absolute zero pressure.
snip

So if we could create a complete vacuum. What would happen if we fired a
single photon through it?

Look up the Casimir Effect for some relevant info.
If we could create a perfect vacuum, devoid even of
quantum vacuum fluctuations, then your photon would
likely traverse the space at slightly greater than c
due to altered permittivity and permeability.