Researching Negative Energy: Where to Start?

AI Thread Summary
Researching negative energy can be complex, as it often leads to confusion between scientific concepts and mythical interpretations. The discussion highlights that negative energy, as understood in physics, refers to specific contexts like gravitational binding energy and electric potential energy, which can be negative under certain conditions. Clarification is needed on what is meant by "negative energy," as interpretations can vary widely. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the context and definitions used in physics to avoid miscommunication. Further exploration into credible scientific sources is recommended for accurate information on the topic.
Kolten
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hello, I apologize if this is not posted in the right section.
I've been trying to learn about negative energy, the kind that can't bend space-time, though when I try to search it, it mostly shows random sites on mythical negative spirtits being negative. So does anyone know a place I can research negative energy properly?
Thank you in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
All forms of energy bend spacetime.

But if you want you can pretend gravity doesn't exist, or consider a situation where general relativistic effects are negligible. In that case, there are lots of examples of negative energy. For example gravitational binding energy is negative in Newton's theory, as is the electric potential energy between two opposite charges. In general you can add or subtract any overall constant you want from all potential energies without changing anything (so you could make all energies negative if you really wanted to).
 
I don't know why this is in QM, it should be in GR but anyways: there is a very famous result in GR that was proven most elegantly by Ed Witten which addresses your question. It is called the positive energy (mass) theorem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_energy_theorem

This is unlike Newtonian gravitation theory wherein the total energy of a system has no lower bound in the reals.
 
Kolten said:
Hello, I apologize if this is not posted in the right section.
I've been trying to learn about negative energy, the kind that can't bend space-time, though when I try to search it, it mostly shows random sites on mythical negative spirtits being negative. So does anyone know a place I can research negative energy properly?
Thank you in advance.

The problem whenever we get a question like this is that (i) there is a proper and clear idea of "negative energy" as used in physics; and (ii) it is unclear what you mean by "negative energy".

First of all, where did you get the idea of "negative energy"? Did you hear it from somewhere or read about it somewhere? A valid reference would be nice.

Secondly, based on what you read, what exactly do you think you understand as being "negative energy"?

It is essential that we clear this up because what you mean by negative energy might not be what physicists consider to be negative energy. Without that clarification, we could be talking about two different things and all our responses and discussion will simply miss each other.

Take note that just in classical mechanics alone, "negative energy" is rather common. An attractive field such as gravity is often designated as a negative potential energy. This is because we can always move the reference "zero" level to where ever we wish, since in practically all instances, it is the CHANGE in the energy that matters, rather than the absolute value.

So it is unclear if you are aware of this, or if you have something in particular in mind. Thus, we need a lot more explanation from you.

Zz.
 
Alright, well I heard about it when reading up on one of NASA's projects the Quantum Thruster. Negative energy used by the quantum thruster bend both space in front of it and behind of it. But since my understanding of the energy is so limited, I can't describe is anymore.
 
comparing a flat solar panel of area 2π r² and a hemisphere of the same area, the hemispherical solar panel would only occupy the area π r² of while the flat panel would occupy an entire 2π r² of land. wouldn't the hemispherical version have the same area of panel exposed to the sun, occupy less land space and can therefore increase the number of panels one land can have fitted? this would increase the power output proportionally as well. when I searched it up I wasn't satisfied with...
Back
Top