On Thursday, February 4, 2021 at 3:35:33 AM UTC-7 Alan Grayson wrote:
> 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. >> > *Is this the GR expression for PE, which you earlier stated is different from Newtonian physics? Now you want to assume rest mass exists in your sphere containing negative vacuum energy. AG* > 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, >> > *In an expanding sphere which is assumed to contain rest mass, why does M or M^2 increase as R increases? AG* 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 come from, which contributes to > the rest energy? TIA, AG * > *Oh, you assume it exists. 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/f72cfded-f4ab-4bae-8a9b-79acb13e3f02n%40googlegroups.com.
