| Welcome to our forum. This is a place for people to debate and rant about stuff. Enjoy! Click here to register. If you're already a member, you can log in here: |
| How do atoms appear in a vacuum? | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: 21 Jul 2012, 02:44 PM (512 Views) | |
| Toxification | 21 Jul 2012, 02:44 PM Post #1 |
|
I've read and heard from several sources, including Steven Hawking's Does God exist? that atoms can appear in a vacuum, yet never heard an explanation for how. I'm not challenging anyone here, I'm just looking for an answer so I can use it as yet another argument against the cosmological argument |
![]() |
|
| BadHouses | 22 Jul 2012, 09:33 PM Post #2 |
|
You should probably google whatever particle it was Stephen Hawking was on about. |
| We'll have a real wild time. | |
![]() |
|
| Yar | 23 Jul 2012, 02:42 AM Post #3 |
|
Sounds like the strings theory to me, although I doubt that I fully understand it, so my retort might be just as ignorant as trying to apply the theory of relativity to human relations. |
![]() |
|
| LuCay | 23 Jul 2012, 07:38 AM Post #4 |
|
Are you sure it was atoms, or particles? I've read about virtual particles 'popping into and out of existence' in the vacuum. Thing is, the vacuum of the physicists seems a bit different to the vacuum that people normally think about. There is still energy in a vacuum (don't ask me how), so it isn't actually 'nothing'. It's not necessarily that the particles appear 'from nothing', it's that they are somehow converted into particles from the energy in the field, but the total net energy remains the same; it's just that now some of that energy is in a different form (momentarily anyway, though these virtual particles are though to appear and disappear all the time, too quickly to be directly detected). The process by which they arise from the vacuum energy is called 'symmetry breaking', wherein an unstable state changes to a more stable configuration, though in this case the particles pop back out of existence almost as quickly as they came. Or some mind-fuck like that. There's a book called 'Symmetry and the beautiful universe' that goes into some of this stuff, though I haven't read it so I can't say how convincingly it does so. |
![]() |
|
| Yar | 23 Jul 2012, 12:48 PM Post #5 |
|
It's because of the uncertainty principle: in accordance with it, the physical vacuum constantly creates and annihilates a number of virtual particles: the so-called zero-point fluctuations of the fields. Also, it is just physically impossible for any vacuum pump to extract all the particles, since once the size of a particle is greatly lesser then the volume it is locked in, only either it's speed or it's vector's direction can be traced, not both at once. |
![]() |
|
| LuCay | 23 Jul 2012, 02:17 PM Post #6 |
|
That made no sense to me. Someday I'll sort through this quantum mechanics business. |
![]() |
|
| Yar | 23 Jul 2012, 03:05 PM Post #7 |
|
Neither it does to me: I have very little understanding of quantum physics, so I'm pretty much just re-translating what I've memorized but can't quite picture in my head. |
![]() |
|
| Ardat | 24 Jul 2012, 12:19 PM Post #8 |
![]()
|
Not atoms, particles. Well, the process is a result of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, stating, in its best known version, that the less indeterminacy you have vis à vis the position of a quantum system, the more its momentum will be undetermined. Now, you have to understand that this indeterminacy is a fundamental property, not merely a lack of precision on the part of the observer. A vacuum isn't empty stuff, it has a specific energy density that could take the form of a photon, except it's not intense enough locally for it to happen. But, just as momentum and position are linked through the Heisenberg principle, time and energy act in similar fashion in that regard (though, not for the same mathematical reasons). So, what you can observe is very short-lived photons, said to be virtual, having an energy that's in the range of what is allowed by the uncertainty principle. It's the limited life-span that makes the energy range significant enough for a photon to be created in a vacuum, which is then divided into a particle and its anti-particle, only to have them meeting moments later and be annihilated, which gives back the energy in its original form. Something along those lines. Edited by Ardat, 24 Jul 2012, 04:37 PM.
|
| What's more fun than fighting crime? | |
![]() |
|
| Yar | 24 Jul 2012, 01:55 PM Post #9 |
|
The name reminds me of "The Miracle of the Snowflake" from Clockwork Orange. 'Now,' said Georgie, 'here is what I should call real dirt. There's one slovo beginning with an F and another with a C.' He had a book called The Miracle of the Snowflake. 'Oh,' said poor old Dim, smotting over Pete's shoulder and going too far, like he always did, 'it says here what he done to her, and there's a picture and all. Why,' he said, 'you're nothing but a filthy-minded old skitebird.' |
![]() |
|
| Toxification | 28 Jul 2012, 04:20 PM Post #10 |
|
So, what created this energy? |
![]() |
|
| Ardat | 28 Jul 2012, 04:24 PM Post #11 |
![]()
|
The vacuum has an energy density; nothing in our universe is ever truly empty. Why? I don't know, and I don't think anyone does at this point in time. |
| What's more fun than fighting crime? | |
![]() |
|
| Toxification | 28 Jul 2012, 04:34 PM Post #12 |
|
Do you think this may have been so before the creation of the universe? And if so how would the big bang have taken place? |
![]() |
|
| Ardat | 28 Jul 2012, 05:17 PM Post #13 |
![]()
|
It's rather unclear whether there actually was a creation at all. And if there was, the Big Bang certainly wasn't it as it's nowadays described to have been a very dense era of our universe and, so far, all attempts to go beyond Planck's wall have shown that there was something prior to the wrongly called beginning of time and space (as far as I know, this stuff are branes, but I'm hardly a string theory specialist).
Edited by Ardat, 28 Jul 2012, 05:19 PM.
|
| What's more fun than fighting crime? | |
![]() |
|
| Toxification | 28 Jul 2012, 05:30 PM Post #14 |
|
How could the beginning be a dense era of the universe? Something had to create that density, or else the universe wouldn't have a beginning as you suggested. |
![]() |
|
| Ardat | 28 Jul 2012, 05:37 PM Post #15 |
![]()
|
Didn't I say it was wrongly called the beginning? |
| What's more fun than fighting crime? | |
![]() |
|
| Toxification | 29 Jul 2012, 04:44 AM Post #16 |
|
Oh, I understand now, missed out a few words. |
![]() |
|
| trickyricky | 15 Aug 2012, 03:09 PM Post #17 |
![]()
|
http://www.cracked.com/article_19978_5-mind-blowing-ways-that-science-has-done-impossible.html |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
|
|
| « Previous Topic · Science & Technology · Next Topic » |
| Theme: Edge | Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
6:56 AM May 20
|
edge created by tiptopolive of IDS








6:56 AM May 20