Does the universe have zero total energy?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of the universe having zero total energy, as suggested by Stephen Hawking in 'The Grand Design'. Participants explore the implications of this idea, particularly in relation to quantum mechanics, gravitational energy, and dark energy. The conversation includes inquiries about formal studies on the topic and the role of dark energy in the universe's energy balance.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants reference Hawking's assertion that the universe could be spontaneously created if its total energy is zero, with mass/energy balanced by gravitational negative energy.
  • One participant cites a Hamiltonian formalism result indicating that the total energy for a closed, homogeneous universe is zero.
  • Concerns are raised about the implications of a positive cosmological constant, suggesting that it may disrupt the balance of energy in the universe.
  • Questions are posed regarding whether the effect of dark energy has changed since the point of last scattering and how this relates to the universe's initial energy state.
  • Speculative ideas about the relationship between dark energy and inflation are mentioned, including the possibility of them being manifestations of the same field, though no consensus exists on this connection.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of the cosmological constant and its role in energy balance, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in understanding the relationship between dark energy and gravitational potential, as well as the assumptions underlying Einstein's equations regarding the cosmological constant.

DJsTeLF
Messages
47
Reaction score
0
Just finished reading Hawking's 'The Grand Design' in which he appears to culminate in saying the Universe was spontaneously created by some sort of quantum mechanical process. He also comments that this is perfectly allowed if the total energy of the Universe is zero, suggesting that mass/energy is balanced with the negative energy associated with gravity.

My questions are therefore:
1/ Can this really be true? Has anyone attempted a more formal/rigorous study of it? (Well, the observable bits anyway.)
2/ What contribution does dark energy have to this Universal energy balancing act?

References / links to papers or articles grately appreciated

I also want to stress that this thread is in no way intended as an opportunity for religious discussion.
 
Space news on Phys.org
DJsTeLF said:
Just finished reading Hawking's 'The Grand Design' in which he appears to culminate in saying the Universe was spontaneously created by some sort of quantum mechanical process. He also comments that this is perfectly allowed if the total energy of the Universe is zero, suggesting that mass/energy is balanced with the negative energy associated with gravity.

My questions are therefore:
1/ Can this really be true? Has anyone attempted a more formal/rigorous study of it? (Well, the observable bits anyway.)
2/ What contribution does dark energy have to this Universal energy balancing act?

References / links to papers or articles grately appreciated

I also want to stress that this thread is in no way intended as an opportunity for religious discussion.
A well-known result from taking the Hamiltonian formalism of General Relativity is that the total energy (matter energy + gravitational potential energy) for a closed, homogeneous universe is identically equal to zero. If you want more detail, this is an authoritative paper on the subject:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/357757q4g88144p0/
 
Thanks for your response Chalnoth. That paper was very interesting. I also found this article about the 'weight' (density actually) of the universe:
http://scienceblog.com/community/older/2000/D/200003072.html

One aspect is still troubling me a little though; Einstein's equations posit that mass/energy density exactly cancels the gravitational potential only for a zero cosmological constant. I'm under the impression that the current consensus in the scientific community is that the cosmological constant is small and positive. I.e. the dark energy driving the accelerating expansion of the universe that we observe. A few questions therefore arise:

Have I misunderstood this completely?
Is the effect of dark energy assumed to have changed since the point of last scattering?
If so, how could the universe have begun with zero total energy and now have an imbalance?

Finally I wonder if anyone has any insightful comments about the relationship between dark energy and inflation? Again, any references / links would be much appreciated.
 
DJsTeLF said:
One aspect is still troubling me a little though; Einstein's equations posit that mass/energy density exactly cancels the gravitational potential only for a zero cosmological constant.
This isn't the case. The cosmological constant was left out because they didn't specify the matter distribution, and the cosmological constant can easily be included within the matter distribution.

DJsTeLF said:
Finally I wonder if anyone has any insightful comments about the relationship between dark energy and inflation? Again, any references / links would be much appreciated.
Well, they're obviously similar in that they both produce an accelerated expansion, but at wildly-different energy scales. There are a number of extremely speculative ideas as to the possibility that they may be the same field (these are usually called "quintessence" models). But so far there is no good reason to believe there is actually a connection.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
9K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
13K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K