B What Does Hawking Mean by Negative Energy at the Big Bang?

Click For Summary
Hawking's concept of negative energy at the Big Bang suggests that there was an equal amount of positive and negative energy, with negative energy being stored in space-time itself. This idea is challenging to grasp without mathematical context, as Hawking acknowledges in his writing. The discussion emphasizes that popular science books may oversimplify complex theories, making them difficult to fully understand without a solid foundation in the underlying mathematics. Additionally, the principle of energy conservation in this context is considered questionable. For a deeper understanding, engaging with more rigorous scientific literature is recommended.
Physics Slayer
Messages
26
Reaction score
8
IMG-20220529-WA0000.jpg

I was reading "Brief answers to big questions" By Hawking, the above pic is from a page of the book, it says that at the time of the big bang there was an equal amount of positive and negative energy, and that the negative energy never went anywhere, the space-time itself is a store of negative energy! I don't really understand what he means by this. In all fairness he does go on to admit that without mathematics this idea is hard to grasp.
can someone try to explain the above in the best way they can (with or without math) or lead me to resources to further dwell into.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hawking did here the best that he could to express without mathematics something that cannot be properly expressed without mathematics. What you are looking at, even though it was written by a respected scientist is a popularization. It is an attempt to give you a taste. Popularizations, generally, are not usable as a basis upon which to reason one's way to a proper understanding of the subject matter. Better to work from a textbook.

The idea of energy conservation that is being relied upon here is on shaky ground to begin with.

https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/GR/energy_gr.html
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and Physics Slayer
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 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
27
Views
5K