What is the Relationship Between Vacuum and Space?
The historical evolution of the concept of "vacuum" [1] can be roughly described as the following.
0) Buddhist Vacuum: the void formlessness, the empty barrier-free. It refers to the place and space where all dharmas exist. There are four meanings: pervasive, immovable, endless, and eternal.
I) Conceptual Vacuum: Aristotle in ancient Greek era believed that " Void separated from the matter does not exist" [2], the void must be filled with matter in order to be able to carry out physical action*. The concept of vacuum at this stage is void, a state of space.
II) Industrial vacuum: Evangelista Torricelli (1608-1647), secretary and assistant of Galileo Galilei (1564-1642), proved the "vacuum" without an atmosphere using a mercury barometer [3]. The concept of vacuum at this stage was static and overlapped with Newton's absolute space.
III) Ether Vacuum: “......, as the recipient of energy, is to regard it as continuously filling all space, and possessing the mobility of fluid rather than the rigidity of a solid. If whatever possess the property of inertia be matter, then the medium is a form of matter. But away from ordinary matter it is, for obvious reasons, best to call it as usual by a separate name, the ether."[4] "The aether is the solitary tenant of the universe, save for that infinitesimal fraction of space which is occupied by ordinary matter."[5]. The vacuum at this stage is the medium through which electromagnetic waves can travel.
IV) Quantum Vacuum: Along with the development of quantum mechanics, numerous vacuum-related concepts have arisen, the ground state, the various excited states, zero point energy, negative energy sea, spontaneous emission, Vacuum polarization, vacuum fluctuations, etc.. "The vacuum is, in fact, precisely the ground state of the fundamental many-field system. "[9]† "In a quantum theory, the vacuum is a very busy place. Particle-antiparticle pairs are constantly produced out of nothing, violating the energy-conservation law by borrowing an amount of energy E from the vacuum for a time t such that Et
Space (more precisely spacetime) is a totally different object than the ``vacuum state''.
Spacetime is defined by its geometry; the vacuum state refers to the state of fields in spacetime, when the occupation number of all the fields vanishes.
In flat spacetime the vacuum state is unique; in curved spacetime it isn'.t.
Dear Stam Nicolis
My understanding of your answer is that spacetime is a larger set than the vacuum; the vacuum is a description of the state of the "invisible" fields in spacetime. However, the visible fields are closely related to spacetime, so does it change the "invisible" fields when it changes the geometry of spacetime? I.e., does the invisible field have nothing to do with the geometry of spacetime? Then how does it fluctuate? How can it drive spacetime expansion?
Best Regards, Chian Fan
There isn't any distinction between ``visible" and `` invisible" fields. There's spacetime and fields in spacetime. These fields can be in different states. One such state is the vacuum state.
The question is not, in my opinion at least, well formulated! A more rigorous enunciate should be: Are Space and Vacuum two different CONCEPTS? And my answer is: YES, THEY ARE!
“【NO.34】How the View of Space-Time is Unified (6) - Are Vacuum and Space Two Separate Things? … What is the Relationship Between Vacuum and Space?....”
- in a couple of SS posts in https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_the_concept_of_quantized_vacuum_And_what_is_the_role_of_gravity_in_nature_And_what_is_the_relationship_between_dark_energy_and_quantum_gravi and links in the posts, most of points in the questions above are substantively enough clarified, so more see this link.
Here only note that to consider the questions above it is necessary before to understand scientifically what are fundamental phenomena/notions “Matter”, “Space”, “Time”, “Energy”, “Information”,
- which are fundamentally transcendent/uncertain/irrational in mainstream philosophy and sciences, including physics; so really rigorous scientific definitions are possible, and are given, only in framework of the Shevchenko-Tokarevsky’s philosophical 2007 “The Information as Absolute” conception, recent version of the basic paper see
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/363645560_The_Information_as_Absolute_-_2022_ed
- where it is rigorously proven that there exist nothing else than some informational patterns/systems of the patterns that are elements of the absolutely fundamental and absolutely infinite “Information” Set.
At that utmost general definition of the absolutely fundamental phenomenon/notion “Information” is
“Information”: “Information is something that is constructed in accordance with the set/system of absolutely fundamental Rules, Possibilities, Quantities, etc. – the set/system “Logos” in the conception”
“Space” is the absolutely fundamental phenomenon/notion – some element of “Logos” set, so any/every concrete informational pattern/system in the Set exists absolutely obligatorily in its concrete space, the metrics of which, i.e. number and nomenclature of this space dimensions, is determined by concrete degreases of freedom at changing of the pattern/system state.
“Time” also is the absolutely fundamental phenomenon/notion – some element of “Logos” set, which relates to changes, and absolutely independently on – what, how, and so in what space, any concrete change happened; and so all changing elements in the Set absolutely obligatorily move at every change only in one, universal in the Set, time [in informational system Matter convenient “ct” dimension] dimension.
Including “vacuum” is some informational pattern/notion, which means “absence of something”, and has concrete meaning in concrete cases; in this thread’s concrete case – absence of any matter; and so the “vacuum’s space” is the same as the Matter’s space , which [+time] is, [as that is rigorously scientifically shown in the in the Shevchenko-Tokarevsky’s Planck scale informational physical model, links to 3 main papers see in the linked thread above]
- fundamentally absolute, fundamentally flat, fundamentally continuous, and fundamentally “Cartesian”, (at least) [4+4+1]4D spacetime with metrics (at least) (cτ,X,Y,Z, g,w,e,s,ct).
Since the Set absolutely for sure exists absolutely eternally/always , i.e. in absolutely long time, in the Set everything exist(ed) and happen(ed) in the Set’s whole spacetime, which has at least “simply infinite” number and nomenclature of space dimensions, including the Matter’s space above, and, again, one time dimension.
So in Matter case there can be two “vacuums”:
- “complete vacuum”, i.e. always existent the Matter’s empty space above before Matter creation; and
- “no matter vacuum”, when on first step of Matter creation in the space the ultimate base of Matter – the (at least) [4+4+1]4D dense lattice of primary elementary logical structures – (at least) [4+4+1]4D binary reversible fundamental logical elements [FLE] was created.
After creation of the lattice on 2-nd step just “Matter”, i.e. seems ~ at least near hundreds of orders [~1080 in mainstream physics] by magnitude number of particles, was created, which are always constantly moving at least in 4D space with (cτ,X,Y,Z) dimensions, and so in parallel simultaneously in ct-dimension, disturbances in the lattice; and so now only some local “vacuums-2” can exist, where the lattice isn’t disturbed, but that really is inessential in physics.
Cheers
Dear Stam Nicolis J.A. Souza
Thank you very much for your answers, hopefully I will understand more and more.
If I define the visible fields as excited states and the invisible fields as ground states, maybe this OK?
If there is a region ΔA in spacetime whose fields are all in the excited state, and another region ΔB whose fields are all in the ground state, the space metric of ΔA may change, while the space in ΔB remains uniformly flat. Let's assume that the particles in ΔA converge to a region Δa (Δa
No, the ground state is one of the states the fields can be found in, that's all. There's nothing special about the number 0. It's not diffdrent than the numbers 1,2, and so on.
What matters is that, in flat spacetime, the state of any field is globally defined,i.e. it's independent of the observer; in curved spacetime, it's not. Whether for the vacuum state (occupation number=0) or for any other state (occupation number >0).
The particular property of fields is that the occupation number can vary from point to point in spacetime.
Regarding the vacuum, there are two other links to related questions currently on Researchgate. There are good answers therein.
1) What is the concept of quantized vacuum? And what is the role of gravity in nature? And what is the relationship between dark energy and quantum gravity ；https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_the_concept_of_quantized_vacuum_And_what_is_the_role_of_gravity_in_nature_And_what_is_the_relationship_between_dark_energy_and_quantum_gravi
2) What is a phenomenon called "false vacuum collapse"? https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_a_phenomenon_called_false_vacuum_collapse
another one: What is a super vacuum? Is the earth in a vacuum? And what is dark energy? https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_a_super_vacuum_Is_the_earth_in_a_vacuum_And_what_is_dark_energy
Hello @Chian Fan,
Concerning III) Ether Vacuum: To be a recipient of, and a store of recoverable energy requires that such recipient possess resistance to energy introduction, such that work is done against the recipient’s resistance and it is this work that is stored as energy in the form of a strain in the recipient and energy recovered when the stress is removed.
Generally, there are two forms of such strains, 1) a longitudinal/compression strain and 2) a shear/rotational strain. The former travels as longitudinal waves and the latter as transverse waves.
- We know that when energy is introduced into the vacuum surrounding a current-carrying wire, this energy causes a solenoidal type of deformation around the wire, described using Ampère’s right-hand-grip rule, which deformation we describe as a magnetic field B.
- We also know that energy propagates as transverse waves through vacuum, e.g. light and gravitational waves.
- We also know that when energy in the form of B comes near a conducting wire, if it is time-varying, it can give rise to an EMF and produce electric current, as per Faraday's work.
From this evidence, we may infer that among the forms in which vacuum stores energy is as a shear/rotational strain B. Whatever stores energy as a shear strain and thus has ability to carry transverse waves must be regarded as an elastic solid.
5) The dynamics in the universe is caused by the universal electric field and its corresponding magnetic field (vector field). Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle only “proves” that the volume of the universe has a structure so it is not 100% homogeneous.
4) E = mc2 shows that matter is a concentration of energy and energy is the manifestation of the dynamics of the universal electric field (see 5). But of course the causation of the dynamics is the total of the basic properties of the universal quantum fields.
3) A particle is not an independent phenomenon, it is a concentration of energy. In mathematics set theory describes the universal electric field. So if energy is locally concentrated, the density of the electromagnetic field around decreases. The universal electric field has geometrical properties thus the local increase and decrease of energy can be described with the help of topology. The consequence is that a particle is a propagation of a local concentration of energy within the decreased energy of the universal electric field around ("vacuum space"). That is the general concept of QFT.
2) The universal electric field is uniform because its properties are identical everywhere in the universe. But because it is a dynamical field the variable part of its properties (the conserved topological dynamics) transforms continuously. The spacetime concept of the theory of general relativity is a macroscopic model so it cannot be incorporated in QFT. Spacetime must be transformed into a quantum theory before it can describe physical reality at the smallest scale size.
Within the boundary of a black hole there is the universal electric field and decreased scalars of the Higgs field. What we have termed “vacuum space” is actually all the volume in the universe where the scalars of the Higgs field have exactly the same magnitude (flat Higgs field). Within the boundary of a black hole there exists no magnetic field (1 dimensional vectors). The term "magnetic field" in classic physics is not the same as the corresponding magnetic field in QFT. Everywhere in vacuum space there exists the magnetic field (QFT).
1) There is no experiment known that energy is equal to volume. Thus it is impossible to decrease or increase the volume of the universal electric field. The hypothesis that space can expand exists because the theorists can not elucidate the non-Doppler red shift of the light of distant galaxies (the farther away, the higher the red shift).
Even in QFT there is the notion of vacuum space (every volume where the Higgs field is flat).
With kind regards, Sydney
Sydney Ernest Grimm,
By “universal electric field” are you postulating that space is populated by charged particles?
If not, what is the source for the electric field?
If yes, would this not constitute an obstruction to the motion of other particles in a straight line due to multiple collisions with the charged particles?
When you say, “The dynamics in the universe is caused by the universal electric field and its corresponding magnetic field (vector field)”, are you borrowing from the E and H of Maxwell’s electromagnetic theory?
Dear Akinbo Ojo
In classic physics an electric and magnetic field is the spatial influence of electrons. Thus both fields are related to the motion of electrons in a conductor (matter).
In QFT the magnetic field is a 3D field that is "build up" by 1 dimensional vectors. Because the cause behind the existence of the vectors are the quanta of energy of the universal electric field (3D) that represent the quantazation of the variances of the structure of the universal electric field.
It is easier to imagine the universe as an enormous solid, although at the smallest scale size the structure shows vibrations because the structure of the solid has variable properties too. Unfortunately we are "build up" by these vibrations so we can only see (and measure) differences between all the vibrations and not the cause behind the vibrations. That is why we have to determine the "hidden causation" with the help of reasoning. And we have only mathematics, our observations and measurements to construct a unified field theory.
From our experiences in daily live we think about an object as a "solid" that moves nearly independent from its surroundings. But in field theory it is the field itself that propagates its own local density from "point to point" within its structure. It is comparable with a row of tumbling dominoes. It seems like the falling dominoes move with a certain velocity in a determined direction. But every dominoe just flips over, it doesn't have a velocity over a long distance.
Maxwell's electromagnetic theory is the macroscopic description of the universal electric field and its corresponding magnetic field in QFT. Most text books are not clear about the necessarily change of concepts that are related to the distinct scale sizes of physical reality.
With kind regards, Sydney
Thanks Sydney Ernest Grimm .
First, I prefer to remain at the classical physics level where some degree of logic still prevails and there is much less of mysticism.
I think to promote understanding, terms that are used in physics must have a common meaning or interpretation.
Electric field E is force per unit charge, i.e. F/q, where the force may be of electrostatic or of magnetic origin. From this, it is difficult to logically accept that electric field, as conventionally defined in the Lorentz force equation and Maxwell’s theory, can be present where charged particles (q) do not exist. I don’t know if that is what you are advocating, i.e. the presence of E where no q exists?
Dear Akinbo Ojo
There is no "physical" difference, the difference is in our mind. And it is caused by the chosen point of view.
In classic physics we follow the changes of an object or even a single particle like an electron (local physical reality). In field theory everything within the volume of the universe changes synchronuously. In line with the existence of non-locality (Noble prize physics 2022).
Of course our universe is local and non-local at the same moment. But it is fundamentaly impossible to understand "everything" with the help of the local point of view. Because it is a limited frame of references (it doesn't envelopes everything that exists).
The local point of view is well suited for experimental physics and technical inventions. And that is what we see in our modern society.
The all-inclusive point of view (non-locality) was already described by the ancient Greek philosophers (Parmenides of Elea, Aristotle, Plato), so it isn't new at all (about 500 B.C.).
With kind regards, Sydney
Sydney Ernest Grimm, I do not dispute the applicability of your point of view. But concerning "universal electric field", can you shed more light on this, given the specific question raised in my last post? Thanks
Dear Akinbo Ojo
Electric fields that are caused by the existence of particles have values that are related to the amount of energy the distinct particles represent. Thus without the concentration of energy the universal electric field shows only small differences of energy between 2 adjacent points within the structure of the field. Actually, the difference is known as Planck’s constant, a really small amount of quantized energy.
Unfortunately, we can only measure mutual relations between the phenomena. We don’t measure the absolute amount of energy at a certain position in space, we measure the difference of the energy between this point and another point. Like we cannot determine the depth of the sea by the waves at its surface.
Anyway, classic physics is useful for models that are meant for engineering and/or macroscopic applications. We can use classic physics for simplified clarifications of local macroscopic phenomena too. So if there is no need for the use of QFT, classic physics is just fine.
With kind regards, Sydney
Hello Sydney Ernest Grimm, The basis of electric field is the presence of charge, which can be positive or negative, but not neutral. Therefore, an idea of a “universal electric field” must either subscribe to the universe being space surrounding a charged body/particle or the space being populated by charged particles, which sum of charges will not be neutral.
If you look under IV) Quantum Vacuum of the list by Chian Fan , you will see “Particle-antiparticle pairs are constantly produced out of nothing…” From that can be inferred that charge conservation appears to be obeyed and therefore charge neutrality is a property of vacuum.
Will the “universal electric field” be positive or negatively charged?
On these grounds, it is difficult for me to accept this concept of universal electric field as being compatible with the charge neutrality of vacuum. Others may be open to it if you have more explanation that takes care of the objections.
Regards, Akinbo
Dear Akinbo Ojo
If we like the phenomenological point of view (the all-inclusive appearance of matter and their mutual influences) the idea of universal quantum fields is really awkward. Moreover, all the grand theories in physics are not in line with each other. Even QFT is incomplete and lacks a proper mathematical foundation. So I agree with you that it is not easy to share opinions about this subject. Fortunately, during the last decades there is some progress because of new insights.
The cosmic microwave radiation (CMBR) represents electromagnetic waves that are thought to origin from the emergence of Hydrogen atoms in the early universe. The idea is reasonable because all the other elements in the Periodic system are compositions of the nucleus of the Hydrogen atom, inclusive Deuterium. Everywhere in the universe we can detect the CMBR because of its homogenous distribution in vacuum space and it shows the characteristics of black body radiation (thermodynamic equilibrium with its environment).
Electromagnetic waves are local linear “ripples” of the universal electric field and its corresponding magnetic field, thus we cannot deny the existence of both fields everywhere in the universe. The data of the detected CMBR shows an overall Doppler dipole so we have concluded that our solar system propagates within the volume of the universe in relation to the electromagnetic field itself (the detected velocity is about 370 km/s). That is why the electromagnetic field must be a cosmic rest frame that corresponds with the imaginary volume of the universe (a box without walls). See: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2041-8213/ac6f08
We can transform matter into electromagnetic waves because a proton and an anti-proton annihilate each other. So “at the end” we have to accept that all the dynamics in the universe originate from the universal electric field and its corresponding magnetic field. Although local concentrations of energy by the electromagnetic field can decrease the magnitude of one or more scalars of the flat Higgs field (Higgs mechanism). The result is the creation of matter and that is why matter and energy are equivalent.
In empty space the electromagnetic field is not flat, it is constantly varying its local amplitudes (see: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature21024). The exchange of energy – actually topological deformation – within the structure of the universal electric field is quantized (h). The direction of the exchange is determined by the magnetic field (vector field) and the structure of the scalars of the Higgs field determines the spatial structure of the vectors of the magnetic field in vacuum space (vectors only exist within a rigid medium).
Thus particle-antiparticles are created by the universal electric field and its corresponding magnetic field. But if there is enough energy to create stable particles, both will annihilate each other. If there is not enough energy both concentrations of energy are termed “virtual particles”. See: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1204.4616
“Charge” like we know it is related to stable particles. That means that the universal electric field in vacuum space has no detectable charge. Although every local amplitude of the universal electric field (a local surplus of energy) cannot exists without a corresponding local deficit of energy. If this isn’t true there cannot exist conservation of energy and momentum in the universe.
With kind regards, Sydney
Yes, Sydney Ernest Grimm , I believe that since CMBR is radiation, whatever is carrying it must have physical properties. In the textbooks these properties include permittivity (ε) and permeability (µ), and there is a relationship between these two that gives the value of light velocity (c). Since we do not see winds of CMBR, as you correctly say, “Everywhere in the universe we can detect the CMBR because of its homogenous distribution in vacuum space…” and “That is why the electromagnetic field must be a cosmic rest frame”, then we must infer that what is carrying the CMBR, i.e. vacuum, must also be motionless. It is a standard of absolute rest. Other mediums, such as air, water or other particulate matter mediums may be moving, but vacuum is unique in its motionlessness.
It is from this motionlessness that Foucault’s pendulum takes the orientation of its plane of swing from.
See my article on this, Article Foucault's pendulum and theories of a light-bearing medium
On the universal electric field, you still do not say if this is a positive or a negative electric field, since it must be one or the other. A neutral electric field is not an electric field. As it is, I find it difficult to subscribe to the existence of universal electric field but encourage your further research on its possibility. Thanks for the exchange.
Dear Akinbo Ojo
The question about the positive or negative energy of the vacuum (volume where the Higgs field is flat) is a bit difficult to explain. But I will give it a try.
The universal electric field and its corresponding magnetic field are a duality in vacuum space. That means that at every point in vacuum space the geometrical change of a unit of the universal electric field (the quantum of energy h) generates a corresponding vector with a related magnitude. But the opposite is also true. A vector with the right magnitude generates the direction of the next quantum of energy by the universal electric field.
From a certain point of view the Higgs field and the universal electric field are a duality too. But now the “exchange” isn’t 1 quantum of energy, the exchange starts if the local “pressure” of the concentration of energy forces one or more scalars of the local Higgs field to decrease their radius.
The consequence is that the universal electric field, the corresponding magnetic field and the Higgs field represent the geometrical properties of quantized space. That means that the volume of our universe is totally filled (tessellated) with spatial units that have identical basic properties. Known as the basic quantum fields. The geometrical model is in line with the existence of the universal conservation laws (energy and momentum) and the existence of Planck’s constant and the constant speed of light (and some universal principles like Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle and the principle of non-locality).
Physics is about the mutual relations between the observable and detectable phenomena. So it is about the geometrical differences between all these units of quantized space (also termed “discrete space”). The volume of the universe is tessellated by these spatial units so change is only possible under one or more geometrical invariances. Now we have to choose between the invariance of the amount of volume of every unit or the invariance of the surface area of every unit.
If we choose the invariance of the surface area the variable is the volume. But we don’t observe that the transfer of energy results in the blow up or shrink of phenomena. A clear example is a particle collider. If a particle is accelerated so it nears the speed of light, only the shape of its volume is partly deformed. But if volume is invariant the particle blows up in the tube of the particle collider and that is not what we observe. E = m c2 confirms that energy is surface area.
So “physical reality” as we know it is all the local (dynamical) differences between the units of quantized space. In mathematics the changes of the universal electric field are described by Cantor’s set theory. The consequence is that a local addition of energy is at exactly the same moment a local subtraction of energy. But the addition/subtraction is fluently because of the speed of light.
The consequence is that the topological deformation of the shape of 1 unit of quantized space is only possible if there is an input deformation and at the same moment an output deformation. That means that the input deformation is caused by one or more adjacent units and the output deformation is the cause of the deformation of one or more of the other adjacent units.
So is the universal electric field negative or positive? It depends on our point of view. If we use the all-inclusive point of view (the whole universe) there is conservation of basic properties. If we look to the vacuum “itself” it isn’t positive or negative. But if we take matter as the (positive) reference frame, the energy of the universal electric field in vacuum is negative.
Within a volume without decreased scalars (vacuum) there are still dynamical amplitudes of the universal electric field and its corresponding magnetic field. For every local surplus of energy there must be a local deficit of energy too. Moreover, if there is geometrical symmetry the amplitudes are easier to detect than without a geometrical symmetry. For example, a proton represents a local surplus of energy but there doesn’t exist a proton nearby with a negative energy (negative mass). Thus the proton has a “asymmetrical counterpart” in vacuum space around that represents the deficit of energy that is equal to the concentrated energy of the proton.
With kind regards, Sydney
The thread question is rigorously scientifically answered only in SS post on page 1.
Cheers
You can have a look, the second half part is about what I think about the quantum vacuum.
Article Superconducting Field Theory (the Unification Theory)
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Philosophy
- Ethics