What Truly Defines a Vacuum?

AI Thread Summary
A vacuum is often described as "empty" space, but the definition is complex and varies based on context. While a perfect vacuum might imply zero air pressure, it doesn't necessarily mean the absence of matter, as matter could exist in different forms. Historically, a vacuum was seen as a region devoid of matter, but advancements in quantum theory have altered this understanding, introducing concepts of probability distributions and field fluctuations. These fluctuations suggest that even in a vacuum, energy and virtual particles can exist, leading to phenomena like matter-antimatter pair production. Ultimately, a true vacuum, devoid of all matter and energy, is not physically achievable.
Swapnil
Messages
459
Reaction score
6
What is vaccum? Many say its "empty" space. But what does "empty" mean? Does it mean that there are no atoms (or protons/electrons, or quarks, or strings)?

Can anyone explain this?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Swapnil said:
What is vaccum? Many say its "empty" space. But what does "empty" mean? Does it mean that there are no atoms (or protons/electrons, or quarks, or strings)?

Can anyone explain this?
Vacuum is not a precisely defined term. A perfect vacuum could mean a space where the air pressure is 0 (That does not necessarily mean that it is empty of matter - just that there is no pressure (matter could have solidified, for example) - or it could mean a space devoid of all matter, although a better term would be "free space".

AM
 
classical idea of vacuum was that of a region in space that are devoid of any matter.. up to the late 19th century, an atom was considered to be the most fundamental particle that constitute the universe, so in classical term, the defination of vacuum was pretty clear and straight forward. But with the advent of quantum theories in early 20th century, the concept of a particle as a point like localised entity in space has been replaced by a more fussy picture of probability distribution in space.. so in essence a particle can no longer be thought of as a localised object in space, which means you cannot pin down the precise location of a particle, which by the was is also consistent with the uncertainty principle. so if you can't pin down a particle to a point how do you talk of a space without particle? and moreover from the field theory, there is always a field fluctuation in space, again thanks to uncertainity principle, which implies that you cannot pin down an energy at a given precise instant of time. so theoretically even if we take the classical case of vacuum there is always a field fluctuation which can lead to matter-antimatter pair production. thus vacuum in its real sense in not possible physically..
 
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Today at about 4:30 am I saw the conjunction of Venus and Jupiter, where they were about the width of the full moon, or one half degree apart. Did anyone else see it? Edit: The moon is 2,200 miles in diameter and at a distance of 240,000 miles. Thereby it subtends an angle in radians of 2,200/240,000=.01 (approximately). With pi radians being 180 degrees, one radian is 57.3 degrees, so that .01 radians is about .50 degrees (angle subtended by the moon). (.57 to be more exact, but with...

Similar threads

Back
Top