News:

Welcome to the Astral Pulse 2.0!

If you're looking for your Journal, I've created a central sub forum for them here: https://www.astralpulse.com/forums/dream-and-projection-journals/



What's the total energy of everything that exists?

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

James S

quote:
I suspect the total energy is zero.

This makes sense if you consider that this then puts the universe's energy into balance.

I know this doesn't work if you consider the low ambient "positive" energy of the zero point field, but again this is, as you pointed out, relitavistic physics. There will always be a point of reference somewhere that changes this potential. If there is a positive zero point field in this universe, it stands to reason there will be a balancing negative field in another.

James.


Logic

You have to take into consideration the presence (or predicted presence) of dark matter and dark energy, since theres considerably more of that than normal matter and normal energy.
We are not truly lost, until we lose ourselves.

volcomstone

I had thought about such a subject along time ago, i had concieved two main idea's , one that the total energy of our universe, and/or the multiplude of others, was either a constant, or more likely infinite

If energy was a constant, then there must be some sort of a "recycling" a sort of refreshment for the stagment usless energy,

if the energy was infinite either negative or positive, then it would be rather hard for us to contemplate the effects it would have,

perhaps infinite, is a steady state, akin to zero, its like if you either have a full glass, or an empty one,  the glass can never get any more full if it is already full, and the glass can't get any more empty if it is already empty

I like talking in useless analogies.
opinions are like kittens, just give 'em away

Ceriel N

The universe may be a lot bigger than 15 billion lightyears, with things moving away from us so fast we can not detect light from them.

Also, the old rule of the preservance of energy has come under fire, so the old ways of thinking may not give the right answer in this case.

Remember, Einstein did not have all the answers. We've still to come up with a unified theory for electromagnetics and gravity, and if you look at some of the applications of Tesla's theories it will once again make reality more incredible than fantasy.
"We work in the dark - we do what we can- we give what we have. Our doubt is our passion, and our passion is our task. The rest is the madness of art."
- Henry James

SomeBloke

Hey Beavis,
Let's face it there was nothing to start with, but if that nothing was somewhere it was localised at a mathematical point, therefore there was an infinite uncertainty in how much energy there was (according to Heisenberg's uncertainty principle).  I know you know what I'm on about 'cos I read one of your previous quantum physics posts! Someday the universe will work it out.

Fat_Turkey

Or maybe they won't.

Total amount of energy? Irrelevant question. The answer for me is just "lots" and I leave it at that.

Later

~FT
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
-Anonymous

No amount of rigorous training, sitting and doing nothing, and clearing one's mind can help a man who hasn't overcome his doubts.

Logic

What about a superposition of both zero and infinite energy?
We are not truly lost, until we lose ourselves.

volcomstone

exactly, zero and infinite have relationships with one another
but what if the "amount" of energy doesn't matter

what if all that matters is the amount of pattern in a system?
what if everything was just infinite interference patterns of waves?
what if the atoms we see are nothing more than the point(s) that the waves of energy are colliding at?

what if there is infinite waves from infinite dimensions that all subtly combine like ripples in water?

I know that physicists can "trap" atoms using laser interference patterns, and you can create a "holograph" with light intereference

but what if someone somewhere created an atom out of interference patterns? would that be sufficient evidence to support the holographic universe theory? well i don't think we live in two dimensions but infinite, thats the only problem with the two-dimensional holograph theory
opinions are like kittens, just give 'em away

TheSeeker

Even if you knew the answer, why does it matter?

Logic

maybe the other dimensions arent as easily accessable or noticable as compared to others
We are not truly lost, until we lose ourselves.

volcomstone

the answer does not matter, the fact is Im trying to comtemplate things which are beyond our understanding, only through questions can we ever find our true abilities,

plus the answer will never remain the same, multiple different answers can be correct in the same circumstances
opinions are like kittens, just give 'em away

beavis

The answer matters to me because if the total energy is nonzero, I would want to find out why that energy exists. If it is zero, the main question that should be asked is why and how the negative was separated from the positive (from nothingness, if such a thing ever existed). Many people would say "god" did it, but thats a copout. If it is to be labeled "god", I want to know how "god" works, so the same questions must be answered with a non-god answer. Dogma hinders learning.

Ceriel N

Ah, OK. It's a version of the concept of the Anthropic Principle. Basically "the universe exists because we are here to see it". If we weren't here to see it, no one could confirm its existance and thus it might as well not exist. From this we can also assume there are coutless other universes, a multiverse, that we are not aware of.

Take vacuum fluctuation into account and you might have an explanation of what the effect awareness has on this non-existence thatexists 'outside'. I tend to refer it as "null", "void", "abyss" or Chaos.

The ancient Greek said "The Cosmos stems from Chaos".

So "God" equals awareness, and is the source of all creation.

Next on Ceriel Nosforit Live: The Truth, Part II.
"We work in the dark - we do what we can- we give what we have. Our doubt is our passion, and our passion is our task. The rest is the madness of art."
- Henry James

beavis

Ceriel N the universe exists because we are here to see it

No. We are here to see it because it exists. The question is not if it exists. It is, why does it exist (without using any dogma in the answer)?

Ceriel N

"I think, therefore I am"
- Descartes

Should have been "I'm aware, therefore I am."
We are aware of the universe around us, and therefore it too Is.
If our minds and bodies were of a different origin than that of our universe, then this could be doubted, but we are aware of our minds and bodies in the same fashion that we are aware of the universe.
"We work in the dark - we do what we can- we give what we have. Our doubt is our passion, and our passion is our task. The rest is the madness of art."
- Henry James

Adkha

I think the total energy must be zero because of the balance of all nature.
There is also and end of the energy/space.

There was no beginning of the universe...nor an end. But here I'm talking about the time line. Not about the energy.
I just cant believe something like infinite energy

Can someone explain me how something can be infinite?
Psycho Paradoxical

1Zenryoku

woah..........
(stupid smart people)[}:)][}:)]

vikram88

Hi Beavis,

In my opinion, the total energy of all the Universes has to be zero. This is because all things in nature exist in an equlibrium. May it be chemical reactions or energy mass interconversions, everything is in equilibrium.

When positive energy is made it has to be accompanied by the formation of equal amount of negative energy. We know that when reactions are in equilibrium, on disturbing the equilibrium the reactants and the products adjust themselves in such a way that equilibrium is again restored. If such is the tendency of things to remain in equilibrium, then there's no way that energy would not obey this.

Even the Yin-Yang states that the formation of anything is accompanied by the formation of it's opposite.

What science has calculated is just the total energy in a given region, which can be both positive, negative or even zero. We know that there are limitless Universes. Thus the only way to calculate the total energy of all universes would be to derive a formula, which can give an exact energy location in all dimension variable and then integrate it partially wrt to different dimensions from negative infinity to positive infinity and adding them up(Here by dimension I mean co-ordinates). Now the derivation of such a formula is out of hands of Human beings as science has not advanced till that stage, but the summation of partial integration of that formula wrt different dimensions from negative infinity to positive infinity will definitely give zero.

All things in this universe follow definite set of rules and one of them which stands on top is equilibrium.

Vikram.

beavis

vikram88 In my opinion, the total energy of all the Universes has to be zero. This is because all things in nature exist in an equlibrium. May it be chemical reactions or energy mass interconversions, everything is in equilibrium.

When positive energy is made it has to be accompanied by the formation of equal amount of negative energy.


That implies the total energy cant change, but it could have always (outside of time) been negative, zero, or positive.

We know that there are limitless Universes.

If that means infinite universes, how did you count them?

If it means without limits, how do you explain the obvious limits of physical existance?

All things in this universe follow definite set of rules

We have approximations to the rules, which are only valid in our local area of spacetime. We know of no definite rules (except for theoretical things).

vikram88

Hi Beavis,

First of all I would like to state that it should be integral of negative infinity to positive infinity. I'll do the editing.

Yes, that certainly implies that total energy can't change, but the equilibrium fact also implies that there can't be a net positive or a net negative quantity. If there is a net positive or negative quantity then it cannot posses an equilibrium state.

Unlimited Universe is an assumption that I have made. This is because of my belief that there are no limits. Till now we have never found a limit and we never will. I think that there is no limits to physical existance either. What science has found is just a fragment of reality.

That's the point. We actually don't know any of those rules. The theoretical rules which imply only to our local area of spacetime are just like short extensions of those rules.

For example::(Hmmm... what should I take)

E=Electric field of a point on the axis of a uniformly charged ring.

E=kqr/(x2+r2)3/2

But when x>>>r, x2+r2==1

So E=kq/r2

So this behaves as an extension to the previous actual formula when we have defined some limits.

In the same fashion there are some specific limits(like time) applicable to our local spacetime and the actual rules diminish into the theortical rules we have formed.

Vikram.

Anonymous

Vikram is right it is zero.  It has also been stated that to attain all energy you must achieve zero.  This is true because of things like cold fusion.  If anyone was ever to get to 0 Kelvin then all energy would be easily accessible.  I think Nicholas Tesla was working on some device like that as well.  His had to do with radio waves or something though.

beavis

vikram88, equilibrium could exist with a nonzero total energy. Energy would move around, but would always be the same amount, equilibrium (assuming energy can only be converted but not created or destroyed). But that is irrelevant because we dont know that the universe is in equilibrium.

E = kqr/(x2+r2)3/2 * (1-A) + A * f(b,c,d,e,f,g) <--- some function with a lot of variables

'A' is a variable that is 0 near spacetime and 1 far away. The left side of the formula tells us nothing about f().

Anonymous

Speaking of energy not being created of destroyed they have found that atoms around a black hole sometimes just disappear (and not into the black hole) or multiple atoms will just appear out of nowhere.  I think it was on the Discovery Channel.  They tried to explain it with multiple universes and stuff like that.

vikram88

Beavis, I don't think that nonzero total energy can remain in equilibrium. I believe that Big-Bang was the result of the inequilibria of total non-zero energy. This is because by some reason or the other our universe contains a net positive energy and it's balancing negative energy was moved to some other universe(the cause may be anything).

We can never tell anything about the funtion f() because all we know is it's extension, just like from E=kq/r2 you cannot deduce E=kqr/(x2+r2)3/2. Moreover in our local spacetime there is no need for that f().

Khuli follower, I think that the appearence and dissapearence of atoms near a black hole is due to the formation of wormholes. This is because due to high gravitational field of black hole, it causes tremendous variations in electric and magnetic field around it and such a phenomenon is the ideal condition for the random production of wormholes.

Anonymous

That may very well be Vikram but I think they were trying to link it to multiverses.  Meaning that we trade material with other universes and that explains the large amounts of mirror matter found outside of blackholes.