So as the title of the question says.
But before talking about anything, I know that there is a principle in quantum physics says that “nothing” is not truly nothing ,,
But the dilemma here is that when you say that this energy is there , it should be infinite in number , and infinity means that the system is broken ,,, but it’s not .
So its about that this energy is newly created and then disappeared continuously, and this will break down Einstein law “at least with this point of view”
Comments
its not creating energy, its just taking energy from quantum wiggles. which sort of always exist even at absolute zero for some reason
you dont even need to take that energy from an atom or molecule, the vacuum of space also has this quantum wiggling
Many scientist from the past will be proven wrong in time.. its just normal.
at the end of the day, you’re talking about two different types of physics.
the concept of zero point energy is quantum mechanics.
einstein’s theory is more ‘classical physics’.
that being said, zero point energy is built on the premise that even at the fundamental levels of the universe’s fabric, there’s still some brownian motion in the particles down there –and that’s based on another thing called Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle. it’s theoretically possible to exploit the energy created by the vibration that may or may not be happening down there. from there, we should be able to get ‘unlimited energy’
If you can figure out how to extract zero point energy, there’s a Nobel waiting for you. While there may be quantum fluctuations, it seems impossible to extract that energy to do useful work.
First of all, Einstein was not the person who said that energy and matter are conserved, he was “just” the one who said that they can be converted to each other. Conversation laws predate him by a lot.
Anyway, zero-point energy is one of those things that’s widely misunderstood. The tl;dr is that while in the classical perspective, you should be able to reduce a system’s energy to zero, in quantum mechanics there’s actually some small but non-zero energy level that lowest energy level that the system is physically capable of having.
The actual proof of this is a little complicated and math-y, but a “heuristic” explanation may be given from Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle: basically, the uncertainty principle says that location and momentum (and thus velocity, and thus kinetic energy) each have some uncertainty about them, and they’re related such that as one becomes more certain, the other becomes less certain. Absolutely zero energy would cause us to know both the location (at the lowest-energy point in the “allowed region”) and the momentum (zero) at the same time, which isn’t allowed.
But also,
>But the dilemma here is that when you say that this energy is there , it should be infinite in number , and infinity means that the system is broken ,,, but it’s not .
>
>So its about that this energy is newly created and then disappeared continuously, and this will break down Einstein law “at least with this point of view”
I think that here you’re confusing two different ideas: the first is the vacuum energy, which is a very specific case of zero-point energy; the second is the spontaneous production of virtual particle pairs. The short answer is that this doesn’t happen in regions where the vacuum is at its zero-point energy; instead, sometimes small regions of “vacuum” (what would be understood as vacuum to any normal person, but which aren’t technically a vacuum according to quantum field theory) can have energy levels above their zero-point energy. This will cause them to sometimes generate a pair of particles which almost always last for mere moments and then come back together, returning the extra energy to the “vacuum” from which they sprang. If you were to do one of the tricks to keep the particle pair from doing that, then you’d be left with the “vacuum” being at a lower energy state than it began at.
The conservation of energy works well on large scales. Things get weird in quantum physics.
“Nothing” in quantum physics is not really nothing. In quantum field theory, what we think of as empty space is actually a jittery, energetic vacuum. This space has quantum fields that are never really at rest. It experiences fluctuations (I’ll explain this), even at absolute zero temperature. It also produces tiny, random pairs of particles and antiparticles that pop into existence and disappear. This present buzz is called “zero point energy” – the minimum possible energy a system can have. So even in “nothing” there is always something happening at the quantum level.
Energy conservation can be “violated” for a tiny bit, as long as it’s for a short enough time. These violations are called quantum fluctuations. It’s like energy “borrows” from the vacuum but pays it back almost immediately. So technically, energy isn’t permanently created or destroyed, it’s borrowed and returned within quantum limits. Einstein’s conservation still holds on average and over time, but quantum physics allows temporary “wiggle room.”
Mathematically, you’re kind of on the right track, because quantum field theory does predict infinite vacuum energy. But physicists renormalize these infinities and they subtract out the unobservable “background” energy. Instead, they focus only on energy differences, which are what affect particles and interactions. The universe isn’t broken though, the effects of vacuum energy are tiny and only noticeable in very sensitive experiments.
Have you ever heard of a rogue wave? A moment where upon the sea several small waves come together in the same place and for a moment there is a giant mound of water capable of capsizing ships and injuring people and then it seems to vanish into the chop again.
This is basically documentary.
Nothing in the universe is perfectly stationary. There’s little bits of potential everywhere moving and sloshing about. And notification enough of it slashes into the same position to make something briefly appear and then disappear again.
And on the most rarest occasions you will happen right at the event Horizon of a black hole and part of what appears will get sucked into the black hole and the other part of what appeared will go racing off into space and even then the total net energy of the universe remains unchanged because whatever fell into the black hole destroyed whatever it came in contact with they’re in disappear back into the chop.
Despite what introductory quantum mechanics books may imply, harmonic oscilator potential do not extist in a vacuum. As an example when a molecule forms, some energy goes to vibration, at least the zero point energy. when the molecule is then destroyed in a chemical reaction, that energy ends up in the products.
Yknow when you’re drinking a coke through a straw there’s always a little bit left no matter how hard you suck?
Energy is like that, there’s always a tiny tiny bit left, no matter how much you’ve moved elsewhere.
There’s this hypothesis that links the expansion of the universe with the big bang.
The gist of it is that the supposed “heat death” is only heat death due to our current scale. Energy is spread so thin, it is for all intents and purposes, imperceptible. But if we were to zoom all the way out … like way way way way out, then all the mass of energy would just “condense” into a single “point”, ie the single point of “big bang” that started everything.
So at the much much larger scale, the cycle we went through would appear to have just started, just as our cycle appear to have started from nothing, it was really expanding from the previous cycle’s heat death at a much much much smaller scale.
Not sure if it even counts as a hypothesis or a proto-hypothesis but this is what I can rmb. Those who know about this, please correct my post ‘cos I am pretty sure I rmb some parts incorrectly.
Let me try and find the source and share it here.