I Can Wormholes Be Created Without Exotic Particles?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter Umaxo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Creation Wormhole
Umaxo
Messages
51
Reaction score
12
Hi,

if i understood correctly from pop-science literature, there is theoretical possibility of formation of wormholes like in this picture: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wormhole-demo.png
bud you need some exotic particles (i think it means negative energy?).

Now what i really don't understand - how is this possible? General realitivity doesn't describe topology of spacetime, you need to assume it. So why this talk about exotic particles, or quantum foam, or entaglements or whatever they talk in popscience as possibility for creation of wormholes? I would imagine that even in empty space i can decide to identify certain parts of the spacetimes, or insert some (flat) bridge (cylinder) between them and still have flat, minkowski metric that describes whole spacetime with wormhole without need of any particles.

Sorry that i don't have specific quote form those pop-science books. So i would be glad just for some brief words on where the research of wormholes that you know of (those that connect certain part of space otherwise separated by long distance, not wormholes like einstein-rosen bridge in schwarzschild that makes no shortcut between two distant points of spacetime) stands in respect to my objections above.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Umaxo said:
Hi,

if i understood correctly from pop-science literature, there is theoretical possibility of formation of wormholes like in this picture: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wormhole-demo.png
bud you need some exotic particles (i think it means negative energy?).

Now what i really don't understand - how is this possible? General realitivity doesn't describe topology of spacetime, you need to assume it. So why this talk about exotic particles, or quantum foam, or entaglements or whatever they talk in popscience as possibility for creation of wormholes? I would imagine that even in empty space i can decide to identify certain parts of the spacetimes, or insert some (flat) bridge (cylinder) between them and still have flat, minkowski metric that describes whole spacetime with wormhole without need of any particles.

Sorry that i don't have specific quote form those pop-science books. So i would be glad just for some brief words on where the research of wormholes that you know of (those that connect certain part of space otherwise separated by long distance, not wormholes like einstein-rosen bridge in schwarzschild that makes no shortcut between two distant points of spacetime) stands in respect to my objections above.

Thanks

Purely classically, I believe it requires a time machine to create a wormhole.

However, there are papers that suggest it'd would be possible to stabilize a wormhole that was created non-classically (say from the 'quantum foam' you menion), via purely classical means. I'd suggest looking at the Moris, Thorne, Yurtserver paper "Wormholes, time machines, and the weak energy condition", <<link>>.

The section where they say "Wormhole creation with such mild space-time curvature that classical general relativity is everywhere, must be accomponied by closed timelike curves and/or noncontinuous choice of future light cone. Which reads as "time machine" in lay terms. In the subsequent section they mention "quantum foam".

There's a popularized discussion in Throne's book, "Einstein's Outrageous Legacy" I believe.
 
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...
According to the General Theory of Relativity, time does not pass on a black hole, which means that processes they don't work either. As the object becomes heavier, the speed of matter falling on it for an observer on Earth will first increase, and then slow down, due to the effect of time dilation. And then it will stop altogether. As a result, we will not get a black hole, since the critical mass will not be reached. Although the object will continue to attract matter, it will not be a...
Back
Top