B Is the Accelerating Expansion of the Universe Wasting Energy?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on whether the accelerating expansion of the universe represents a waste of energy. It is argued that the concept of "creation" of space is misunderstood, as the expansion does not have a singular speed and is defined by the Hubble constant. Participants note that no energy is expended for the universe to expand, as matter is in free fall. The total energy of the universe cannot be defined in a universally agreed manner, making the question of energy waste unanswerable. Ultimately, the expansion of space and its implications are complex and not easily categorized.
mister i
Messages
19
Reaction score
7
This is my first (non-professional) post: It seems accepted that space is "created" (otherwise the expansion of the universe would exceed the speed of light). We are talking about "creation" (!!). The question would be: does current physics tell us if this represents a waste of energy for the universe? (which would be different from the energy of the vacuum, which is the energy that exists within space, but not its creation, for me they are different things)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
mister i said:
It seems accepted that space is "created"
I don't think that's accurate.
mister i said:
otherwise the expansion of the universe would exceed the speed of light
The expansion of space, to the extent that's really a thing, does not have a single speed. It is quantified by the Hubble constant, and comparing this to the speed of light is like asking if a kilogram is more than a meter. It doesn't make sense.
mister i said:
does current physics tell us if this represents a waste of energy for the universe?
I don't think there's a meaningful question to answer here - you can't define the total energy of the universe in a way anyone can agree on, so whether or not it is changing isn't answerable.
 
mister i said:
We are talking about "creation" (!!).
No, we're not.

mister i said:
The question would be: does current physics tell us if this represents a waste of energy for the universe?
No energy is expended for the universe to expand. The matter in the expanding universe is in free fall.
 
Ibix said:
The expansion of space, to the extent that's really a thing, does not have a single speed. It is quantified by the Hubble constant, and comparing this to the speed of light is like asking if a kilogram is more than a meter. It doesn't make sense.
here talks about acceleration and velocity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerating_expansion_of_the_universe
 
mister i said:
here talks about acceleration and velocity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerating_expansion_of_the_universe
And, as it says, the key quantities are the scale parameter ##a## and its derivatives and the Hubble constant. Individual galaxies have a velocity (although there are caveats), but this is not limited to be below ##c## and does not characterise the expansion.
 
Moderator's note: Spin-off from another thread due to topic change. In the second link referenced, there is a claim about a physical interpretation of frame field. Consider a family of observers whose worldlines fill a region of spacetime. Each of them carries a clock and a set of mutually orthogonal rulers. Each observer points in the (timelike) direction defined by its worldline's tangent at any given event along it. What about the rulers each of them carries ? My interpretation: each...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
6K