Is Space Merely a Manifestation of Matter and Energy?

Click For Summary
The discussion explores the concept that space may not exist independently of matter and energy, suggesting they could be intrinsically linked. Participants debate the nature of dark energy, proposing it might contribute to the expansion of space rather than merely existing within it. The idea that space and time are interdependent is emphasized, with assertions that gravity could be a property of space-time curvature rather than a distinct force. Theories about the coexistence of matter and antimatter on separate planes are also introduced, with implications for understanding gravity and the universe's structure. Overall, the conversation challenges conventional views on the relationship between space, matter, and energy.
  • #31
Metallicbeing said:
Yes, and the world's leading scientists once "believed" the world was flat. I know, new ways of thinking are always hard to swallow.

But it doesn't matter, it's not like I'm trying to write a TOE or anything. I'm just here to collect ideas for my sci-fi novel. As long as the readers think it's interesting enough, that's good enough for me.


I think it might be interesting enough for a scifi novel. Although I hear that few people have actually thought the world was flat since the greeks discovered that it was round. :)
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #32
Getting back to the original inquiry.
Perhaps space doesn't exist apart from matter and energy? I. e. matter and energy aren't in space, matter and energy are space? Maybe silly I know.
I believe this to be so. Do you have an explanation for how this could be so?
 
  • #33
mee said:
I think it might be interesting enough for a scifi novel. Although I hear that few people have actually thought the world was flat since the greeks discovered that it was round. :)

Ha ha, very funny. Don't make me get "anti_crank" after you. :devil:

:-p
 
  • #34
Metallicbeing said:
Yes, and the world's leading scientists once "believed" the world was flat. I know, new ways of thinking are always hard to swallow.

But it doesn't matter, it's not like I'm trying to write a TOE or anything. I'm just here to collect ideas for my sci-fi novel. As long as the readers think it's interesting enough, that's good enough for me.

Ou of correctness, the discovery that the world was not flat actually long pre-dates anyone who could be descibe as a scientist, the fact being discovered by the Greeks centuries before the birth of Christ.

The belief that the world was round is a fairly recent discovery was one that originated in the 19th century.
 
  • #35
UltraPi1 said:
Getting back to the original inquiry.

I believe this to be so. Do you have an explanation for how this could be so?


Sorry, just a vague idea that it might be so. :)
 
  • #36
jcsd said:
Ou of correctness, the discovery that the world was not flat actually long pre-dates anyone who could be descibe as a scientist, the fact being discovered by the Greeks centuries before the birth of Christ.

The belief that the world was round is a fairly recent discovery was one that originated in the 19th century.

Wow, you guys are just ready to pounce on anything, aren't you!? It was just an off the wall comment. No real thought was put into it... really. :rolleyes:
 
  • #37
mee said:
Sorry, just a vague idea that it might be so. :)

Well... That was pretty "safe", wasn't it? :-p
 
  • #38
mee said:
Sorry, just a vague idea that it might be so. :)
Well I'll put my two cents in.

Matter is the localization of the foci of energy packets, and space is the extension of those localized packets. The extension is the equivalent of a gravitational field. The mass of these packets is attributed to the self interaction of it's own extension (gravitational field). All matter is no more than the sum total of the geometric representation within the foci and extension of the energy packets, and an energy packet is no more than a representation of nothing at all.
 
  • #39
UltraPi1 said:
Well I'll put my two cents in.

Matter is the localization of the foci of energy packets, and space is the extension of those localized packets. The extension is the equivalent of a gravitational field. The mass of these packets is attributed to the self interaction of it's own extension (gravitational field). All matter is no more than the sum total of the geometric representation within the foci and extension of the energy packets, and an energy packet is no more than a representation of nothing at all.

I find it hard to believe that "energy packets" would be a representation of nothing at all.
 
  • #40
I find it hard to believe that "energy packets" would be a representation of nothing at all.
No one is the wiser if these geometric entities of nothing act in accordance with what we term physical laws. We have all been fooled into thinking that reality is physical rather than conceptual. I call this quality (The Reality Of Non-Existence). Their is no difference between matter and space other than the foci of a geometric representation of nothing verses the extension of it. You can find similarity between the two by simply being in a dark room. Both space and matter are black, or clear whichever you prefer. I prefer clear. I can safely say that if I were in a dark room at night and looked down, that I could see through the entire Earth. I wouldn't see the sun on the other side because the visible light from it isn't capable of penetrating through the Earth. Nevertheless - There it is ... The true nature of Existence.
 
  • #41
jcsd said:
Ou of correctness, the discovery that the world was not flat actually long pre-dates anyone who could be descibe as a scientist, the fact being discovered by the Greeks centuries before the birth of Christ.

I wonder what you consider a scientist that you would consider the Greeks who discovered that the Earth is round as not included. Why don't you consider the process by which they demonstrated that the Earth is round as being related to science? When do you consider that science began, and who was the first scientist, in your opinion?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K