Just study normal QM ..stay away from controversy.

Dear Abbas Kashani

That is an interesting topic, unfortunately there are not much active RG members who are familiar with the topic (as far as I know).

Vacuum is not a well defined concept. In the past vacuum was every volume without matter. But nowadays vacuum has another meaning too: vacuum is every volume in the universe where the local Higgs field is flat (no decreased scalars). The underlying idea is that rest mass needs local decreased scalars. That means that >99% of the volume of a Hydrogen atom is still vacuum space.

If we redistribute all the concentrated energy in the universe – atoms, molecules, objects, celestial bodies, etc., etc. – to the volume of vacuum space, the universal scalar field (Higgs field) is flat again. That means that all the scalars in the universe have exactly the same magnitude.

This enormous volume without matter is still “filled” with energy because the whole volume is tessellated by the universal scalar field (Higgs field), the universal 3D topological field (electric field) and its corresponding vector field (the magnetic field). At the moment that energy is concentrated by these 3 basic quantum fields (the creation of local matter) new forces are created too: the strong force, the weak force and the force of gravity.

So we cannot speak about quantized vacuum, because it is too limited. The quantization envelopes the whole volume of the universe. That’s why they mostly use the term “quantized space” (quantum gravity).

In a universe without matter the universal electric field doesn’t differ from the universal electric field now. So there are the continuous fluctuations of the universal electric field that create local amplitudes [C. Riek et al. (2017); “Sub-cycle quantum electro­dynamics”. Nature 541, 376-379 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature21024]. The linear propagation of the fluctuations of the universal electric field is the constant speed of light (c). The energy fluctuations itself are quantized and known as Planck’s constant (h).

Now it is easy to derive the mathematical (geometrical) property of the quantum of energy. Because our “model” is limited to the existing 3 basic quantum fields that tessellate the whole volume of the universe.

If energy is equal to volume, the acceleration of a particle must result in the increase of the volume of the particle. That is not what we observe. The shape of an accelerated particle changes, but not its volume (length contraction). Now there is only one possibility left: energy is surface area. In line with Einstein’s formula E = m c2 (if energy is volume, the formula have to be E = m c3).

However, how must we interpret the relation between energy and surface area?

Now your quantization of space comes into sight. Because if space itself is quantized, the volume of our universe has a structure and the units of the structure are the volume quanta of the universe. So every unit has a volume and a surface area. Although the surface area of every unit is a joint surface area with the adjacent units around. Therefore the 3 basic quantum fields represent the dynamical properties of the units of the structure of quantized space (also termed “discrete space”).

That is what they told us when we started our scientific education: physical reality is about the mutual relations between the observable and detectable phenomena (= dynamical properties).

With kind regards, Sydney

The ``quantized vacuum'' is the state that is annihilated by the annihilation operators of the excitations described by the theory. In flat spacetime it's unique, in curved spacetime it's not.

The role of gravity is in defining spacetime curvature. More specifically, in imposing invariance under general coordinate transformations=diffeomorphisms. It is this, defining, property of classical gravity that leads to the inevitability of spacetime singularities. How this symmetry emerges from a quantum theory of gravity isn't known, since a quantum theory of gravity isn't known.

Dark energy is well defined in classical gravity, where its effects can be described by the cosmological constant. What it means for quantum gravity isn't known.

Abbas Kashani ,

we have an example of "background energy" acting in the macro but most do not even consider as such because they did not see this as such...

Following a sort of Cavendish experiment set twin masses in deep space and let them go... you have a "system" of approaching masses till they collide and form just one. You have to assume potential energy transferred into the the "system" to justify the kinetics of their approach and after collision there is radiation emission.

Where such potential energy comes from ?

From the masses?

if one applies the invariance of rest mass and energy conservation it is not difficult to arrive at the necessity of the "background energy"....

Dear Sidney Ernest Grimm

research engineer

Netherlands

Basics of physics and mathematics

Dear Esteem Nikolis

PhD, HDRmaître de conférences at the University of Tours

Tours of France

Dear Stefano Quatrini

Winner of the Electronic Engineering Award of the Polytechnic University of Ancona, research and development engineer in the Ordine degli ingegneri della provincia di Ancona

Italy

Hello dear physics, quantum and cosmology scientists, I am very happy that you answered my question, I am very proud and thank you. Abbas

To answer the question “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”

- it is necessary before scientifically to define/understand what are really objectively existent “vacuum” and “gravity”, and further – what are really existent only in mainstream physics, first of all in Standard particle Model, QFTs, and further cosmology, “physical vacuum”, “true vacuum”, and “false vacuum”.

For that is necessary before to define/understand really scientifically what is the fundamental phenomenon/notion “Mater”, for what is necessary .also to define/understand what are other really fundamental phenomena/notions, first of all in this case “Space”, “Time”, “Energy”, “Information”, which all are fundamentally completely transcendent/uncertain/irrational in mainstream philosophy and sciences, including physics, - while all these phenomena/notions really can be really scientifically defined/understandable only together.

So really in mainstream physics really everything, i.e. “space”, “time”, “particles”, “fundamental Nature forces” – and so the Forces’ mediators – and so “charges” and “fields”, etc., are fundamentally completely transcendent/uncertain/irrational as well.

Correspondingly in every case when the mainstream addresses to any really fundamental problem, then result is completely logically inevitably is nothing else than unscientific/transcendent/mystic something.

Really Matter – and all other really phenomena/notions above - can be, and well essentially are, really scientifically defined/understandable only in framework of the Shevchenko-Tokarevsky’s Planck scale informational physical model, 3 main papers are

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354418793_The_Informational_Conception_and_the_Base_of_Physics

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/367397025_The_Informational_Physical_Model_and_Fundamental_Problems_in_Physics

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369357747_The_informational_model_-Nuclear_Force

Including in the model it is rigorously scientifically shown that Matter’s ultimate base is 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], which is placed in the corresponding Matter’s 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).

The spacetime is fundamentally nothing else than some infinite “empty container” – which contains inside so just “vacuum by definition”, and both – the 8D space with metrics (cτ,X,Y,Z, g,w,e,s), and the 1D time dimension, ct, fundamentally cannot be “contracted”, “dilated”, “curved”, “quantized”, so on.

Everything in Matter exists and happens as some disturbances in the lattice, so in this case the notion “physical vacuum”, can be, in principle, be introduced, i.e. the case when the lattice isn’t disturbed everywhere, and that seems was just after the “inflation epoch”, when first version of the lattice was formed [more see the 2-nd link, section “Cosmology”], but after “Matter”, i.e. real particles and fields was/were created in the lattice, this notion looks as superfluous;

- while the mainstream physics “physical vacuum”,where in every space point all numerous in the mainstream “virtual fields” of all numerous “Forces”, and all “virtual particles” that are some “excitations of virtual fields” constantly and always for some mystic reasons and by some mystics ways appear and also mystically disappear/ “annihilate”,

- and further “false vacuums” that are some mystic “bubbles of state of “true vacuum””,

- really are nothing else than some fantastic mental constructions. Everything in Matter exists and happens only really

The thread is rather long already, so now

Cheers

So let’s continue

As well as Gravity is fundamentally nothing else than some fundamental Nature force, which acts in the absolute absolutely flat Matter’s spacetime above, which is in a few traits similar to other – Electric Force that is well “quantized”, and at gravitational interactions eventually all interactions – as also interactions of all real Forces – fundamentally are QM interactions. But since Gravity is extremely weak Force, really only “ too-not QM” masses tangibly enough on background of other Forces interact, and so the QM nature of gravity really practically inessential in most cases in Matter,

- though can be essential if Gravity strength is extremely large; what can be in some exotic material objects, first of all – in central objects of supermassive black holes.

Nonetheless even in such cases Gravity fundamentally hasn’t any relation to “dark energy”, which is introduced in mainstream cosmology aimed at “to explain” seems real accelerated expansion of matter [of cosmological objects] in 3D space, which in cosmology is “explained” as that is expansion of the space, when the expanded space “carries” cosmological objects apart; and that is described in cosmology by introducing the “cosmological constant” in the GR equations.

That in cosmology isn’t, of course, some explanation – “dark energy” is some completely ad hoc mystic energy that has no any relation to everything what is known in physics; while, again, Matter’s spacetime is absolute and cannot expand; while the main GR postulate that gravitational interactions are interactions in systems “mass-spacetime-mass” is fundamentally wrong.

However, if the expansion really happens, that can be because of the FLE-lattice expansion, what, with a well non-zero probability, firstly in extremely short time happened at “inflation epoch”, when the first version of the lattice was formed from possibly one primary FLE. In both cases for that some large portion of energy was spent, but this energy is completely beyond physics, more see section “Cosmology” in 2-nd link in the SS post above.

SS posts in

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Does_inflationary_cosmology_epitomize_the_concept_of_a_just-so_story_with_meagre_evidence

https://www.researchgate.net/post/NO33_What_Does_the_Dimensionless_Nature_of_the_Fine-Structure_Constant_Mean, and

- reDzennn comments, 9/8 [because the moderator] passages, in

https://phys.org/news/2024-01-phenomenon-false-vacuum-decay.html Nature Physics (2024), , and [5 passages] in

https://phys.org/news/2024-01-gravity-strong-strength-proton.html Reviews of Modern Physics (2023), ,

- are relevant to this thread question

Cheers

My dear Sergey Shevchenko

Emeritus doctor at the Institute of Physics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine

Greetings and politeness and respect to the honorable and dear teacher

I am very surprised by your complete answer. Thank you very much. Thank you Abbas

Dear Abbas Kashani ,

I agree with Sydney Ernest Grimm , the space phace ('vacuum') of any a prriori entity cannot be quantized. The gravity is due to the radial deficiency of this spatial phase, which increases in the direction of the core phase.Gravity gets an excellent explanation based on this metaphysical approach. That's way exists garvitons. You will also have the interpretability of the garvitation wave. Einstein's free-fall explanation is acceptable in this context... Newton's gravity also has its place of interpretation.

Regards,

Laszlo

P.S: Today I have luck. In the early hours of this morning, I managed to film with a smart phone a simple phenomenon that can be used to illustrate (visualise) how gravitons are created and how they help to emit light... Tomorrow the video will be presented at my YouTube Chanel: https://www.youtube.com/@Geo-Intuition