Infinite universe and energy/matter boundaries

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of an infinite universe and the implications of energy and matter boundaries within it. Participants explore theoretical models, the applicability of conservation laws in cosmology, and the nature of the universe's size and structure, including the observable universe.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant inquires whether an infinite universe with finite energy and matter leads to regions devoid of matter and energy, questioning the implications for homogeneity.
  • Another participant argues that assuming an infinite universe while positing finite mass/energy leads to contradictions, emphasizing that conservation laws may not apply on cosmological scales.
  • Some participants reference differing views on energy conservation in general relativity, noting that while some physicists assert it is not conserved, others argue it can be defined under specific conditions.
  • A participant expresses confusion about how to calculate the universe's size at different stages if infinity is assumed, suggesting that discussions may only pertain to the observable universe.
  • There is a mention of the Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey (BOSS) data suggesting the universe is flat and possibly infinite, but the extrapolation of this data is questioned by others.
  • One participant highlights that while energy conservation is debated, what is conserved in general relativity is the stress-energy tensor, which includes various forms of energy and momentum.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of an infinite universe regarding energy conservation and the nature of the universe's size. There is no consensus on whether energy conservation applies in general relativity or how to interpret the universe's structure and boundaries.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the unresolved nature of energy conservation in general relativity and the dependency on definitions of energy. The discussion also reflects uncertainty regarding the universe's overall size and the implications of observational data.

  • #31
Clayjay said:
Cosmology indicates there does not seem to be a finite amount of energy but instead, because of Dark Energy energy, an increasing energy

Increasing in the sense of its effect on spacetime (that it increases its expansion) or increasing in the sense that it is permanently increasing in "quantity" or value, inherently?

Thank you all for your answers! I think I must read more about topology.
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #32
phinds said:
Sounds like you need to brush up on your knowledge of fundamental particles. The atom is not even close to being the smallest constituent of matter. It is made up of protons, neutrons, and electrons, of which only the electron is a fundamental particle. Protons and neutrons are made up of quarks.

The smallest practical is an atom in classical physics. A subatomic particle is considered a particle-wave. That is not a classical concept but the beginning of quantum mechanics. Context controls meaning. When is a particle not a particle - when it is a quantum particle. Duality is trademark quantum mechanics.

Sounds like you need to bush up or start leaning the formal rules of logic and meaning making as a separate field of study from science. Science is much more understandable when the foundation of science is understood. Science is a context before it has content that expresses knowing or understanding. Knowing the context of science greatly enhances understanding the content of science.

I think we view things from different vantage points but we share data points. Thanks for pointing out particle in a subatomic context. Partial is a term used in both contexts but the idea is different. Reality was solid in a classical way but in a quantum way reality hardly exist at all. The atom is .9999% empty - who knew :-)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
8K