Is the Universe Truly Empty or Filled with Potential?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion explores whether the universe can be conceptualized as a "container" of matter and energy, questioning the implications of this metaphor. It highlights the complexity of defining "container," suggesting that the universe and its contents are inseparable aspects of reality. The conversation references Einstein's skepticism about the independence of space-time from matter and energy, implying that empty space-time may not be feasible. Participants agree that the universe cannot be empty, as it inherently contains matter and energy. Overall, the idea of the universe as a container is deemed problematic and misleading.
David Brill
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Does it make sense to think of our universe as a "container" of matter and energy? If so, is there some minimal content?
 
Last edited:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
David Brill said:
Does it make sense to think of our universe as a "container" of matter and energy?

It's hard to say until we have a clear definition of "container" (general principle: any time you find yourself using scare-quotes in a question, the question still isn't precise enough to have an answer).

Clearly the universe contains matter and energy, so maybe the answer is "yes". But you already knew that, so I don't think that's what you mean.
 
Hm ... a container usually can exist independently of its content, but I remember some quote from Einstein where he questioned that space time can exist independently from matter and energy.
 
David Brill said:
Does it make sense to think of our universe as a "container" of matter and energy? If so, is there some minimal content?
I always think of it as just a metric. Things have varying distances from each other and the measure of those distance is the metric of space. They change distances from each other and that is one way to formulate a metric of time. "Container" is just too loaded a word, as others have already pointed out.
 
Given the usual definition of the universe is all of existence, space and its contents are all a part of that same reality, so it makes little sense to assign a separate identity to either entity.
 
I would usually think of a container as being a material object which encloses other material objects.
(Well I guess it doesn't need to be strictly material, since there are things like magnetic confinement.)
However, there are by definition no objects or fields outside of the Universe, so therefore the contents of the universe cannot be said to be enclosed (or contained) by any such external object (or field).
 
Last edited:
I guess I shouldn’t have used the word “container”. Basically, I was just wondering if the universe could be empty. That is, could space-time exist without having anything in it?

After reading your replies, I get the impression that that’s not possible. One comment above says that Einstein questioned whether space-time could exist independently of matter and energy. Additionally, I couldn’t find much online except for a theory, the Milne Model, that has apparently been discredited.
 
Back
Top