On Tuesday, February 2, 2021 at 2:38:06 PM UTC-7 [email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 31, 2021 at 10:34 PM Alan Grayson <[email protected]> wrote: > > *> On the energy issue, what really bothers me about your stance on this >> issue, is NOT that you can't offer a possible model or explanation for >> where the energy comes from to create those other worlds, but that you >> don't even recognize that such an issue exists. Others in this MWI cult >> behave similarly. AG * > > > There is no energy issue, we've known from General Relativity as far back > as 1915 that the conservation of energy does not hold on the cosmic level, > not if completely empty space retains some residual energy and General > Relativity allows for this. The gravitational potential energy of a sphere > of particles of matter like sand is alway negative, this is true in > Newtonian Physics and remains true in General Relativity, so the > gravitational potential energy of a sphere of particles of mass-energy M > and radius R is PE= (-G*M^2)/R where G is the gravitational constant. It’s > important to note that this is negative energy so the larger R gets the > closer the potential energy gets to zero, and if it was at infinity it > would be precisely zero. if the sphere expands and is made of sand which is > normal matter then M stays the same but R increases so the gravitational > potential energy becomes less negative and more positive, and that means > it's uphill; It would take an external expenditure of work to do that, so > if you let the sphere go to rest it would fall inward as you'd expect. > > However if the sphere is primarily made of empty space and empty space > contains energy then things would be different because unlike an > expanding sphere made of sand the density of mass /energy inside an > expanding sphere of empty space would not decrease with expansion, so when > the sphere expands although R increases M^2 increases even more, so the > overall gravitational potential energy becomes larger and thus more > negative. So if the vacuum contains negative energy as this sphere increases > in size it becomes more negative and that means expansion is downhill, > and thus no work is used but instead work is produced. So in any universe > in which vacuum energy dominates it will expand, it will fall outward and > accelerate. Regardless of if there are many worlds or only one, most > think vacuum energy is what makes our universe accelerate. You might ask > if the sphere gets larger what makes it get larger, where did that > mass/energy come from? The answer is It comes from the gravitational energy > released as the sphere of vacuum energy falls outward. So at any point in > this process if you add up all the positive kinetic energy and energy > locked up in matter (remember E=MC^2) of the universe and all the negative > potential gravitational energy of the universe you always get precisely > zero. > > John K Clark > *Basically, I don't understand your argument (which doesn't mean it's wrong). For starters, where does the mass comes from, which contributes to the rest energy? TIA, AG * -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/164c6ce1-54b0-46c6-a623-14cf0513c0b1n%40googlegroups.com.
