RE: Something from Nothing? A Vacuum Can Yield Flashes of Light
February 15, 2013 at 11:53 pm
(This post was last modified: February 15, 2013 at 11:53 pm by ManMachine.)
(February 15, 2013 at 8:01 pm)John V Wrote: This doesn't show that you can get something from nothing. It shows that a vacuum isn't "nothing." A vacuum in our universe has space-time curvature, and is "never completely empty" as your article notes.
You are completely correct, but the fundamental problem with quantum vacuum experiments is that we can never be anywhere in the universe were there is no matter. To state a quantum vacuum is never empty is redundant simply by the fact someone (or something) is always there to make the observation (and by implication so is the local effect they/it will have on space-time).
It seems incredible to me that many scientists and commentators on this topic still apply linear thinking. If there is one thing quantum physics and in particular wave function collapse has taught us is that the observer is a key part of the physics.
But, difficulty is to be expected. Einstein struggled with Uncertainty right up until his death, and I can see that a similar process is happening in modern physics with the something from nothing universe theory. It will take years to build up supporting evidence before we can extrapolate any kind of answer.
It is, perhaps, right and proper that the physics will take years to be proved or disproved, but meanwhile Noether's symmetry holds the remarkable distinction to be one of very few mathematical theorem that works for both Newtonian and Quantum physics. In the search for a unifying theory we could do a lot worse than start here.
MM
"The greatest deception men suffer is from their own opinions" - Leonardo da Vinci
"I think I use the term “radical” rather loosely, just for emphasis. If you describe yourself as “atheist,” some people will say, “Don’t you mean ‘agnostic’?” I have to reply that I really do mean atheist, I really do not believe that there is a god; in fact, I am convinced that there is not a god (a subtle difference). I see not a shred of evidence to suggest that there is one ... etc., etc. It’s easier to say that I am a radical atheist, just to signal that I really mean it, have thought about it a great deal, and that it’s an opinion I hold seriously." - Douglas Adams (and I echo the sentiment)
"I think I use the term “radical” rather loosely, just for emphasis. If you describe yourself as “atheist,” some people will say, “Don’t you mean ‘agnostic’?” I have to reply that I really do mean atheist, I really do not believe that there is a god; in fact, I am convinced that there is not a god (a subtle difference). I see not a shred of evidence to suggest that there is one ... etc., etc. It’s easier to say that I am a radical atheist, just to signal that I really mean it, have thought about it a great deal, and that it’s an opinion I hold seriously." - Douglas Adams (and I echo the sentiment)