Is Any Part of the Universe Truly Empty?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TRUGONOWFOR
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Empty Universe
AI Thread Summary
The discussion explores the concept of "empty" space in the universe, suggesting that what we perceive as emptiness may not be truly devoid of matter. It highlights the gravitational argument, indicating that regions of space that do not attract mass can be considered empty. Spectroscopy, particularly in the infrared range, can reveal the presence of elements in these seemingly empty areas, with estimates suggesting about 100 hydrogen molecules per cubic kilometer and trace amounts of helium. The conversation emphasizes that space is not entirely empty but is generally almost empty. Ultimately, the definition of "empty" varies based on the criteria used to assess it.
TRUGONOWFOR
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
I have just recently read a book entitled THE HOLOGRAPHIC UNIVERSE in which it is suggested that what we now call empty space is only called empty because we are like fish that cannot see the water they swim through. Is there a reason to consider that any area of the universe is empty?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well... there is always the gravitational argument: mass attracts mass. So if a region of space does not attract other mass, then you can assume it's empty (or rather: not very full). Also, from spectroscopy outside the visible range (mainly infrared) you can make a pretty good guess as to how many elements there are in "empty space", as well as which elements they are. I believe that the real "empty" places have about 100 hydrogen molecules per qubic kilometer (correct me if I'm wrong!) and also trace amounts of helium. Not a lot!
 
It depends on what you mean by "blind." Our eyes aren't the only thing we can use to see. It also depends on what you mean by "empty" because space is generally considered to not be completely empty, just ALMOST completely empty.
 
I think it's easist first to watch a short vidio clip I find these videos very relaxing to watch .. I got to thinking is this being done in the most efficient way? The sand has to be suspended in the water to move it to the outlet ... The faster the water , the more turbulance and the sand stays suspended, so it seems to me the rule of thumb is the hose be aimed towards the outlet at all times .. Many times the workers hit the sand directly which will greatly reduce the water...

Similar threads

Back
Top