The Universe's Sum: Is Zero Theory Plausible?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Brunolem33
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Infinity Zero
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the plausibility of a theory suggesting that the sum of everything in the universe is zero, exploring concepts of matter, anti-matter, and the nature of forces such as gravity. Participants examine the implications of this theory in the context of the universe's creation and its fundamental properties.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that forces and energies in the universe may cancel each other out, leading to a net sum of zero.
  • Others argue that while matter and anti-matter may balance, gravity is a one-way force that cannot be canceled, as it is always attractive.
  • A participant questions whether the universe can be described as being made of energy acted upon by forces, or if there is something else at play.
  • One participant acknowledges a misunderstanding about the balance of matter and anti-matter, noting that there is more matter than anti-matter.
  • Another participant suggests that the excess of matter over anti-matter implies a finite creation of both, raising questions about the conditions of their creation.
  • It is mentioned that the current understanding is that matter and anti-matter were created in equal amounts during the Big Bang, but interactions favored matter, leading to the observed asymmetry.
  • A participant presents a hypothetical scenario comparing the creation of numbers from zero to the creation of the universe, suggesting that an infinite universe could emerge from a total sum of zero.
  • Concerns are raised about the validity of theories discussed, with a request for references to support claims made in the thread.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the cancellation of forces and the implications of matter and anti-matter. There is no consensus on the plausibility of the zero theory or the nature of the universe's creation, indicating ongoing debate and exploration of these concepts.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of the concepts discussed, including the nature of forces and the conditions of the universe's creation, without resolving the underlying assumptions or definitions involved.

Brunolem33
Messages
66
Reaction score
0
I read about a theory according to which the sum of everything the universe is made of is likely to be zero.
For example, forces cancel each other, positive and negative energy cancel each other, and so on.
Is there some support for this theory, or is it generally dismissed?
 
Space news on Phys.org
As far as matter & anti-matter, it is my understanding that they would balance each other out, but not all forces cancel. As far as we know, gravity is a one-way force.
 
But wouldn't gravity be somehow "cancelled" by the cancellation of matter?

I am going to add another question to my first one:

In its most primordial state (or fundamental state, I am not sure what the right terms are), can we say that the universe is made of energy, upon which forces are acting?
Or is there something else and what is it?
 
Actually, I was mistaken. There is more matter than anti-matter. https://www.slac.stanford.edu/pubs/beamline/26/1/26-1-sather.pdfAnd no, not really.. Gravity cannot be canceled in the sense that while the electromagnetic force has attractive and repulsive properties, gravity has only attractive properties. And yes, we can. We can say this because energy = matter, and forces act upon matter.
 
What I mean is that without matter, gravity would disappear, rather than being cancelled, because gravity is linked to mass, which in turn is linked to matter.
 
Yeah, but there is matter.. Without matter, none of these forces would work..
 
As far as I understand, the reason for an excess of matter over anti-matter is still subject to debate, and research.
Yet, wouldn't an excess of matter over anti-matter imply that a finite amount of both was created?
Otherwise, if matter and anti-matter were created in infinite quantities, how could there have been more of one than the other?
 
It is expected that matter and anitmatter were created in equal amounts in the big bang. Subsequent interactions tended to favor the production of matter over antimatter (for example, a certain particle preferentially decayed into matter over antimatter) leading to the present-day asymmetry.

There could be infinite amounts of both if the universe is infinite; however, all we can measure are abundances in our observable universe. That's why cosmologists measure energy densities.
 
Thank you for this input.
Back to the title of the thread, how can an infinite universe be created from zero, zero being only a way of describing it right before the BB.
To simplify, let's consider only numbers.
Starting with zero, one can create an infinite quantity of numbers, 1, 2, 3, 100 and so on, as long as one also creates - 1, - 2, -3 , - 100 and so on, so that the sum total of the numbers created always remains equal to zero.
Such a creation is instantaneous, there was zero and in no time there is an infinite quantity of numbers.
Yet, as a whole nothing has really been created, as would have been the case if, say, only positive numbers had been created.

An observer can then find out that there is much more complexity than what appears at first sight, that these numbers can be manipulated, dissected, transformed in multiple ways, that one can start building equations with them, in the process discovering a whole (mathematical) universe.

Now, if the numbers were replaced with the energy and forces created with the BB, and that this energy and forces were then transformed into more and more complex things, yet cancelling each other on a global scale, an infinite universe could be created out of nothing, with its total content amounting to nothing.
 
  • #10
Brunolem33 said:
I read about a theory

Please give a reference, and please review the PF rules for acceptable references. There are lots of pop science "theories" out there that aren't valid.

Until an appropriate reference is given, this thread is closed. Brunolem33, if you have references, please PM me.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
9K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
92
Views
10K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K