I Alexander Vilenkin and energy of a closed universe

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the energy of a closed universe and the implications of using Hamiltonian mechanics in general relativity. It highlights that the Hamiltonian of a closed universe is zero, which leads to debates about the physical meaning of positive and negative energy concepts, particularly those based on pseudotensors. Participants argue that pseudotensors may lack physical significance, complicating the interpretation of energy in non-stationary spacetimes. The conversation also touches on Tryon's model, which has been criticized for requiring unrealistic assumptions about conserved quantities and the nature of gravitational potential energy. Overall, the dialogue emphasizes the ongoing complexities and unresolved questions in the field of cosmology regarding energy definitions and their implications.
  • #31
PeterDonis said:
If you can convince all the people who have written papers claiming that pseudotensors, or at least some of them, do have physical meaning, sure. :confused: As I noted before, two of the people you would need to convince are Vilenkin and Guth.
I am not sure why so many people think there is anything wrong with energy not being conserved, it wouldn't be magic how it isn't.Does Inflation theory require the usage of pseudotensors to work or something of the sort?
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #32
Question69 said:
Does Inflation theory require the usage of pseudotensors to work
To my knowledge, no, the model can be formulated entirely in terms of tensors and pseudotensors are not necessary. From what I have read in the literature, the emphasis by some physicists on pseudotensors is more a matter of their beliefs or opinions about physical interpretation than about actually making predictions from the model.
 
  • Like
Likes Question69
  • #33
PeterDonis said:
To my knowledge, no, the model can be formulated entirely in terms of tensors and pseudotensors are not necessary. From what I have read in the literature, the emphasis by some physicists on pseudotensors is more a matter of their beliefs or opinions about physical interpretation than about actually making predictions from the model.
I am not really against these sorts of things physicists do, I think the philosophy of physics is a really interesting field of study.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K