Creation of matter and energy out of nothing.

avito009
Messages
184
Reaction score
4
I got a question in my mind as to how the tiny dot of matter during the big bang contained so much energy that could create the universe. Remember this tiny dot contained so much energy that it could transform this energy into matter in the form of the universe (Remember E=MC2).

The Quantum field theory says we can create something out of nothing. So the energy or matter created after the big bang would be more than the initial energy or matter. This is due to quantum fluctuations. In quantum physics, a quantum vacuum fluctuation (or quantum fluctuation or vacuum fluctuation) is the temporary change in the amount of energy in a point in space. False vacuum was formed by means of a random quantum fluctuation. Let me explain what false vacuum is. Empty space has various phases, just as water has solid and liquid phases. So False Vacuum is a phase of vacuum. When water freezes to form ice, it releases energy. When false vacuum "freezes" (Or decays) to form true vacuum (a different phase of the vacuum) it also releases energy. There's nothing really true or false about "true vacuum" and "false vacuum;" those are just the historical names that ended up being given to certain particular states of the field. A false vacuum is not the state of least energy and it can decay into a state of least energy or true vacuum state. During inflation, the expansion rate of the universe was controlled by the gravitational repulsion of the false vacuum.

Eventually the false vacuum decays to true vacuum or ground state which is the lowest energy state, and the energy that had been locked in it is released. This energy produces a hot, uniform, soup of particles (Quark-Gluon Plasma). The false vacuum would eventually decay into a low-energy true vacuum, the decay of the false vacuum at the beginning of the universe could cause a rapid expansion at ever-increasing rates, which is called cosmic inflation. This energy released after decay of false vacuum is called primal energy which came from a false vacuum. Then the universe was created from this primal energy. Remember E=MC2.

So I am saying that matter and energy were created out of nothing due to Quantum Fluctuations. So, am I correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hmmm...I understand your line of reasoning but have you considered the inherent failure for the laws of deductive logic to allow for something which is nothing to become more than it what it was once. So the real mystery to be solved is not whether you are correct about your conclusion that something came out of nothing because of "quantum fluctuations"...but rather...what is wrong with the structural integrity of "quantum fluctuation" theory which allows for it to be considered a potential truism that "nothingness" can become "somethingness"?
 
avito009 said:
I got a question in my mind as to how the tiny dot of matter during the big bang contained so much energy that could create the universe.

Actually the modern view is the universe is a free lunch:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-energy_universe

Strangely it turns out gravity has negative energy and it balances the positive energy of matter.

Thanks
Bill
 
  • Like
Likes Jilang
avito009 said:
False vacuum was formed by means of a random quantum fluctuation.

We don't know whether false vacuum was created, or existed primordially, or even whether can exist. I think it may be a good idea to tone down the level authoritativeness in your statements.

Let me explain what false vacuum is. Empty space has various phases, just as water has solid and liquid phases. So False Vacuum is a phase of vacuum.

Your explanation is incomplete. A vacuum state is a state where any small change in quantum fields would increase energy. IOW: a vacuum is a state with local minimum of energy.

If the laws of nature (equations governing interaction of all existing quantum fields) are such that there are more than one configuration of fields which exhibits local energy minimum, then nature has more than one possible vacuum.

When water freezes to form ice, it releases energy. When false vacuum "freezes" (Or decays) to form true vacuum (a different phase of the vacuum) it also releases energy. There's nothing really true or false about "true vacuum" and "false vacuum;" those are just the historical names that ended up being given to certain particular states of the field. A false vacuum is not the state of least energy and it can decay into a state of least energy or true vacuum state.

Correct.

During inflation, the expansion rate of the universe was controlled by the gravitational repulsion of the false vacuum.

This is currently not known. What you state is just one of many theories.
 
avito009 said:
The Quantum field theory says we can create something out of nothing.

IIRC there is no known consistent QFT which describes gravity. So, all known working QFTs operate in Minkovski space of Special Relativity. They do not describe "gravitational repulsion" or any other aspect of gravity. As far as QFTs are concerned, they can only describe a fixed, non-changing volume of space. It may be infinite, but it can't be expanding - QFTs just don't have means to handle that.

So, no, QFT does not say that we can create something out of nothing. In today's known QFTs, energy is conserved.

I think it's quite likely that when we will find a consistent description of quantum gravity, it won't be conserving energy. GR already has difficulties with that.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!

Similar threads

Back
Top