Chronology |
Current Month |
Current Thread |
Current Date |

[Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |

*From*: Spinozalens@aol.com*Date*: Wed, 6 Oct 2010 18:36:51 EDT

Energy Conservation and the BIVERSE

There are various cosmological models which attempt to explain the creation

of the Universe(s). Vic Stenger's "A Scenario for a Natural Origin of the

Universe" based on the No Boundary Model published in Philo is a good

example. These models are based on what Cosmologists call "Third Quantization."

In this class of models we can equate the creation of Universes with the

creation of virtual particles in the vacuum of space. We get the following

Identities.

Particle = Universe

Interaction Vertex= Topology change

Matter field = wave function of the Universe

Free Laplacian = Wheeler De Witt Operator

Vacuum = Void

In these models Universes are created in Pairs for the same reason

particles and virtual black holes are created in pairs, to ensure conservation

principles. This is indicated by the quote below.

From the "The Universe Before the Big Bang" by Maurizo Gasperini Pages150,151

"The crucial difference with respect to the process of chapter 6 is that

the oscillations now being amplified are those of the Wheeler De Witt wave

function, representing the evolution of the Universe. Hence, the process can

once again be described [in the context of the third quantization of the

Wheeler De Witt function]. As of pair creation. However, the resulting pairs

are not particles, but pairs of Universes, directly produced from the

string perturbative vacuum,i.e. from the initial state of the pre big bang

scenario."

"In the same way as the particles emerging from the vacuum are produced in

pairs and characterized by opposite physical properties [i.e. opposite

charges, momentum, angular momentum, etc.] to avoid violations of conservation

laws, the Universes are also produced in pairs, and are characterized by

opposite kinematic properties. One of the two Universes expands while the

others shrinks. However, the shrinking Universe behaves as if it were

traveling backwards in time in mini superspace."

It is well know, on the other hand, within the context of second

quantization, that a particle moving backwards in time ought to interpreted as an

anti particle, with opposite charge. Moving forward in time. Thus, in a third

quantization context, the shrinking Universe must be reinterpreted as an

anti-universe which is expanding, and the anti tunneling process must be

seen as pair production of Universe and anti-Universe, both expanding, one

toward the singularity and the other toward the current low energy regime"

End quote

In addition, in these models the interaction vertex is replaced by a

topological structure known as an Instanton (two merons). This topological

structure provide a mechanism for CPT reversing across the saddle point, the

origin of these Universes.

However, in this post I will, using a semi Newtonian description,

demonstrate a connection between energy conservation and the BIVERSE model by

"proving" that the creation of a single Universe rather than a BIVERSE violates

energy conservation. This therefore is another argument for the BIVERSE

model.

INFLATION

It is often said that inflation is the ultimate free lunch. This is

because mass energy is created by also creating equal and opposite signed

gravitational energy. In fact it's this negative gravitational energy which causes

the inflating Universe to fall up. This is easy to see. Given the gravity

potential energy equation

E_G= -G*M^2/R

We can that in "falling down" which is defined by

dR/dt <0

takes the system to a lower more stable energy level. However, in the

state of false vacuum with a non zero Vacuum energy density, the more stable

condition is accomplished by the Universe "falling up." We get;

M= rho_vav*V = rho*(4pi*R^3/3)

Therefore

E_G= -16*pi*GR^5*rho^2/9

Assuming rho_vac is constant we get

E_G=-k*R^5

Given that during inflation

E_m= - E_G

we see that

dE_unv/dt=0

After inflation is launched.

But this is not the whole story. As related by DR Whittle of the

University of Virginia

"To Actually Start the expansion, we need a minimum of amount of vacuum, a

seed patch, if you like, to get the process off and running. It's actually

not too difficult to see why. Going back to the Sphere, if it expands to

add to this shell (additional energy at launch) the extra gravitational

energy released is G*M_sphere*M_shell/R and this must be greater than

M_shell*c^2 in order to make the extra shell. Notice that the M_shell's cancel , so

for inflation to get going we need G_M_sphere/R >c^2. Basically you need a

big enough sphere to generate enough gravitational energy to create the new

shell."

End Quote

Therefore we can take this at the minimum point and say

E_min= R*c^4/G

Assuming inflation at the GUT scale where

R= 3E-29 M

we get

E_inf= 4E15 Joules ( 44 gms)

Based on this we can see that inflation can't be launched in a proto

Universe with a flat space metric. This connects well with our understanding of

the tunneling process which is proposed to create new Universes. In their

landmark paper "Origin of the Universe as Quantum Tunneling event" David

Atkatz and Heinz Pagels prove that only finite Universes may tunnel into

existence. As we shall this will connect well with Whittle's assertions above.

But first we must look at the energy condition of a Universe (Hubble Volume)

as a function of its overall geometry.

The total energy any comoving observers "sees" is given by

E(R) = E_mass(R) + E_grav(R)

Based on the homogeneous nature of the Universe we can write

E(R)= E_mass(R) - 2*G*E_mass(R)*M(R)/(R*c^2)

M(R) = O*rho_crit*V

M(R)= O*c^2R^3/(2*G*R_H)

Where O is the density parameter and R_H is the Hubble Radius.

Therefore

E(R)= E_mass(R)- O*E_mass(R)*R^2/R_H^2

E(R)= 1- O*R^2/R_H^2

For the Hubble volume we get

E_H= E_mass*(1-O)

We can see from this only in flat space in the total energy of the Hubble

volume zero. But based on the assertion by Atkatz and Pagels it would take

an infinite energy fluctuation to tunnel into existence a flat Universe.

Now let's go back to Whittle's assertions and see where this takes us. Based

on Whittle we have

E_vac= R*c^4/G

We can easily see that this gives us

Rho_vac= 3*c^4/(4*pi*G*R^2)

We know from the Friedmann equations that

Rho_crit= 3*c^4/(8*pi*G*R^2}

Therefore

O= rhp_vac/rho_crit = 2

E_H= E_mass*(1-O) = E_mass*(1-2) = - E_mass

Therefore in an inflating Universe at the moment of launch

E_H= -E_vac

A Universe that is falling up.

However if Universes are created in pairs we also have

E_H= - E_mass*(1_O)= + E_mass

Therefore

E_Biverse= E_H(+)+ E_H(-)=0

A zero energy creation event. ( Actually the supplemental energy states

are needed to sum energy to zero, the implications of this is still under

consideration. This is made apparent in the Venziano-Gasperini model.)

In addition since

a=a(0)exp{sqrt[Lambda/3]*c*t}

We get the interesting equation

t(efold)= R(0)/c

Given inflation at the GUT scale we find that

t(efold)= 1E-37 sec

Which is the correct value predicted by the inflationary models.

While the above is in no way rigorous, it nevertheless seems useful.

Bob Zannelli

))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

_http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/Godless/Origin.pdf_

(http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/Godless/Origin.pdf)

- Prev by Date:
**[Phys-l] PhysTEC Call for Proposals** - Next by Date:
**[Phys-l] Energy Conservation and the BIVERSE** - Previous by thread:
**[Phys-l] PhysTEC Call for Proposals** - Next by thread:
**[Phys-l] Energy Conservation and the BIVERSE** - Index(es):