Jump to content
Science Forums

Empty Space Inside Galaxies Must Be Different Than Empty Space Outside Of Them


Recommended Posts

 

I think if we could figure out a way to remove quantum fluctuations from a vacuum, the contents of the cavity would not be subject to gravity/spacetime. If a baseball was inside, it would start to float.
 
Has anyone ever put a vacuum in a Faraday cage? 

 

 

I think this is wrong.

 

The vacuum does not exist without quantum fluctuations of virtual particles. Dark Energy drives the expansion of the universe and this is again likely caused by virtual particles. 

 

In some theories the absorption of virtual particles ie the reduction of the density of virtual particles around matter causes gravity, and the apparent curvature of space time.

 

The density of virtual particles inside a black hole is likely less than outside the blackhole.

 

Black holes destroy matter falling into them, likely converting matter into radiation.   A baseball inside the black hole would be torn apart.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Isn't it strange we can track the gap between some galaxies spreading faster than the speed of light? Two galaxies are gaining distance so fast that it's quicker than light. Well, that's what they tel

Your inability to understand something does not necessarily mean it must be wrong. 

If each supermassive black hole has a singularity ..they are entangled with the first singularity ..the big bang

Is it possible that the big bang and the start of spacetime are two separate events? We are finding out that inflation is a load of [email protected] https://phys.org/news/2019-11-planck-space-observatory-universe-sphere.html

 

I'm thinking the big bang might not of happened at all. The quantum field (infinity) was instantly filled with atoms that were separated evenly. Somewhere in the middle of the universe, a sphere of spacetime was enacted that expanded at the speed of light. With spacetime comes gravity, so mega black holes formed the galaxies. That expanding spacetime sphere is what is expanding in the already existing quantum field.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Is it possible that the big bang and the start of spacetime are two separate events? We are finding out that inflation is a load of [email protected] https://phys.org/news/2019-11-planck-space-observatory-universe-sphere.html
 
I'm thinking the big bang might not of happened at all. The quantum field (infinity) was instantly filled with atoms that were separated evenly. Somewhere in the middle of the universe, a sphere of spacetime was enacted that expanded at the speed of light. With spacetime comes gravity, so mega black holes formed the galaxies. That expanding spacetime sphere is what is expanding in the already existing quantum field.

 

 

In that case then you might like to look up fred hoyles “steady-state universe” https://www.irishtimes.com/news/science/fred-hoyle-the-brilliant-man-who-lost-the-big-bang-debate-1.2398830

Link to post
Share on other sites
There is an initiating spacetime bubble that covers every inch of space as it enlarges, but as galaxies form, sub bubbles form allowing nothingness between them.

 

The cosmic background radiation map isn't proof of a big bang. It's just spray from all the Gamma Ray Quasars that formed.

 

The quantum field has always been and always will be. Spacetime has a beginning. The current universe OBVIOUSLY is a mix of spacetime bubbles and nothingness (empty quantum field). I imagine the first iteration of the universe started by a god filling infinity (the quantum realm) with evenly spaced virtual atoms. Then an analog spacetime simulation was written to bring the virtual atoms to life by giving them gravity to form galaxies. The nothingness between galaxies was not considered a problem because a single galaxy was enough to support an ecosystem.

 

I think we will find that gravity is exactly the strength necessary to make this happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What makes you think there should be a beginning of time, or even an edge to the universe. 

 

Cosmic Background radiation is definitely evidence for something hot happening, whether it be a big bang, multiple big bangs, blackholes exploding, etc are all cause for new theories. The inflationary universe is the leading model at the moment. ie space inflated followed by big bang, and the universe as it is modelled today. Penroses theorizes this could repeat over and over again aeon after aeon. 

 

By Quantum field I assume you might be referring to zero point energy which might be dark energy. 

 

The Pantheist view of god is that god is the universe. If you were to read a little about the inflation and big bang you might find your view of space expanding driving virtual particles apart for sufficient time for them to become real, resulting in a lot of new unstable particles leading to Baryogenesis and a the hot big bang.

 

A better understanding of exactly how space works, will hopefully lead to a better understanding. Gravity is very interesting, Eric Verlinde another theoretical phycicists reckons gravity is caused partly by entanglement. This link might amuse you. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ovRZuv5Lo8

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unobserved-Empty Quantum field doesn't have a beginning, but spacetime must because of the way it is sitting in nothingness. If you reverse time, all the spacetime galaxy bubbles will move towards each other instead of away.

I don't think Dark Energy is a thing. Spacetime bubbles naturally sink into nothingness.

 

OK might you view your space time bubbles naturally sinking into nothingness as quantum foam in flow. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2169169_Gravity_as_Quantum_Foam_In-Flow Reg Cahill is on the fringe, but he has a theory which suggests gravity is caused by quantum foam (space bubbles) inflow ie quantum foam which supports space is absorbed by mass causing the apparent space time curvature. 

 

If you google Reg Cahil you will see he has had this theory for a long time, his ideas are way more simpler than Verlindes theories, he is however viewed as a crackpot by some. essentially though both Verlindes ideas and Cahils ideas support MOND which indicate Relativity is wrong. Which is an amusing line of thought :)

 

Quantum foam short utube by greene https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQBhpLwKKEw

 

Edit there is a view that space is quantum foam or the zero point field, without the zero point field there would be no space. You could check out stochaistic electrodynamics if you want to confuse yourself further. ie the zero point field could be considered to be the aether.

Edited by Flummoxed
Link to post
Share on other sites

We know electrons and protons repel each other ..could this give us a clue why galaxies are repelling each other?

Doh!

 

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!  

 

I give in. I posted enough links to invoke reasonable discussion if you took the time to read them, clearly you have not as you have not commented on any of the links, or raised your game. 

 

Here is some speculation. 

 

The expansion of space is been driven by dark energy the most likely candidate for this is zero point energy, however the math as it is constructed at the moment does not match the observations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-point_energy (hint read the link) Note zero point energy is made up of virtual particles that do not exist long enough to violate the conservation of energy laws. These virtual particles can not be regarded as moving or stationary in space as they do not exist long enough, however they do cause a pressure as can be proven by the Casimir effect. 

 

Space likely does not exist without zero point energy which could be loosely described as an aether.  The density of which causes space time curvature effects of general relativity. 

 

Real particles/energy absorb virtual particles from the zero point energy reducing its density, creating a gradient and space time curvature. Without real matter/particles the density of zero point energy carries on increasing driving the expansion of space. 

 

I am going on holiday again. Enjoy the rest of your thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nothingness is what was here before spacetime. Nothingness doesn't have gravity or heat. Spacetime bubbles repel away from it without gaining momentum. The CMB is patchy because it is what you get when plasma shoots threw the cosmic web filaments that make up the universe.

 

If there was a big bang, was it in the shape of a web? Was the spacetime web already here and the big bang is observation being turned on?

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Universe isn't expanding ..the voids in the cosmic web are.

The original sphere of spacetime is still enlarging, causing more volume of nothingness to disperse among all voids. It also answers why it appears to be going faster ..bigger the sphere, the more volume it takes in.

 

We have like 54 galaxies in our local group, they are not gaining distance from each other like the rest of the galaxies outside the group

 

The Hubble constant has a reliable means of being measured now.

 

Just measure the rate of expansion of the voids. That number will tell us how big the initiating spacetime bubble, in the preexisting quantum realm, has gotten.

 

The original sphere of spacetime might be better named original sphere of observation, that way spacetime and voids can exist inside it.

 

If everyone if following along, I'm saying Dark Energy isn't a thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...