Notices
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: negative energy

  1. #1 negative energy 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    37
    1.
    It is possible to draw negative energy from Casimir phenomenon although the distance between the plates I> than 1 mm?
    2.
    There are other ways of drawing negative energy?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    130
    What do you mean by "negative energy"?
    Usually, energy does not have a sign.
    Only when speaking of work or heat you add a "-" when work is done by the system you're in or heat goes out.


    I am.
    You can't deny it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    37
    Negative energy is remarkable for example, Casimir phenomenon...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    419
    If by negative energy you mean the exotic stuff that Kip Thorne would use to keep a wormhole open ( which see ), then , although related to the Casimir effect, as both involve virtual particle creation, there is no negative energy unless one of the virtual particles disappears from this universe into a black hole. This exotic material with negative energy can only be 'harvested' at the edge of an event horizon surrounding a black hole.


    If I remember correctly, this was from Kip Thorne's book, Black holes, Einstein's Outrageous Legacy.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    37
    Thannk for information.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by MigL
    If by negative energy you mean the exotic stuff that Kip Thorne would use to keep a wormhole open ( which see ), then , although related to the Casimir effect, as both involve virtual particle creation, there is no negative energy unless one of the virtual particles disappears from this universe into a black hole. This exotic material with negative energy can only be 'harvested' at the edge of an event horizon surrounding a black hole.


    If I remember correctly, this was from Kip Thorne's book, Black holes, Einstein's Outrageous Legacy.
    I've read about this conjecture before. It's hard for me to understand the idea of how one component of a virtual particle pair becomes negative energy simply by falling past the event horizon of a black hole.

    If a virtual particle pair forms far away from a black hole and they are separated by some other mechanism (being struck by a photon, for instance), the result, as far as I know, is a particle and its antiparticle going their separate ways. These particles are both normal particles in the sense that their rest mass represents normal energy according to E=mc^2.

    One possibility that occurs to me is that the energy of these real particle pairs comes not from the virtual particle pair production itself, but from the mechanism that separates them. In the case of an impacting photon, the energy of the photon would have to be equal to rest mass energy of the particle-antiparticle pair and the kinetic energy of these particles after the collision. Thus the net change in the energy budget of the universe remains unchanged. The energy of the photon is converted into the energy of the particle and its antiparticle

    Similarly, in the case where one particle is torn away from its antiparticle at the event horizon of a black hole, the gravitational energy of the black hole would be the means by which these particles gain real rest mass energy and kinetic energy. In this scenario, since one particle falls into the black hole and the other doesn't, the black hole recovers only part of the energy imparted on the pair. As a result, the black hole loses gravitational energy.

    Is this description more or less what's referred to when one component of a virtual particle pair falls into a black hole and is said to represent negative energy?

    Chris
    It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow.
    Robert H. Goddard - 1904
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    37
    Thank for informations.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    130
    What the heck is negative energy supposed to be?

    Energy is the capacity to do work.
    So negative energy would be what?
    And specifically, what exactly does the word "negative" signify in this context?

    One possibility to think of it for me might be, due to E=mc˛ , that negative energy equals some sort of negative mass, having "antigravitational" effects on space.
    thanks in advance for answers.
    I am.
    You can't deny it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    37
    Yes you are right but for example:

    formula mas as function speed m=m0/sqrt(1-v^2/c^6)
    could result + and - and complex nubers

    + is normal
    - is negative
    jN is another dimension.

    I knew this is only sepeculative. But who knew...

    By.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by mastermind
    What the heck is negative energy supposed to be?

    Energy is the capacity to do work.
    So negative energy would be what?
    And specifically, what exactly does the word "negative" signify in this context?

    One possibility to think of it for me might be, due to E=mc˛ , that negative energy equals some sort of negative mass, having "antigravitational" effects on space.
    thanks in advance for answers.
    Your question mirrors my question in my previous post:
    Similarly, in the case where one particle is torn away from its antiparticle at the event horizon of a black hole, the gravitational energy of the black hole would be the means by which these particles gain real rest mass energy and kinetic energy. In this scenario, since one particle falls into the black hole and the other doesn't, the black hole recovers only part of the energy imparted on the pair. As a result, the black hole loses gravitational energy.

    Is this description more or less what's referred to when one component of a virtual particle pair falls into a black hole and is said to represent negative energy?
    Like you, I'm hoping someone will be able to explain this concept.

    Chris
    It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow.
    Robert H. Goddard - 1904
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    419
    As iI understand it, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle allows for a certain leeway in some related observables like position and momentum as well as energy and time. It is the latter two which account for virtual pair creation. For a small enough period of time ( such that the HUP is satisfied ) energy can be 'borrowed from the universe to create a virtual particle/antiparticle pair. During this period of time their wavefunctions are still somewhat overlapping even if moving apart, so that at the end of this short time period, they annihilate and release the energy back to the universe ( conservation of energy law ).
    If this happens on the event horizon of a black hole there is the possibility that one of the virtual particles is trapped and can't escape the event horizon, it effectively leaves this universe. The other particle is then free to roam off as a real particle, this is kown as Hawking radiation and is proportional to the area of a black hole and as such is related to the hole's temperature and entropy.
    The problem, now is that the universe is owed some energy, since the two particles can never recombine to release energy back to the universe. The energy needs to come from somewhere and so , even though the black hole has absorbrd a particle and should be getting bigger and more massive, the opposite actually happens, it loses mass/energy back to the universe.
    Now I don't remember the exact reasoning that Kip thorne used, but I do remember that this area next to the event horizon is where exotic material with negative energy density would be harvested.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    37
    And what about dark energy or energy in Casimir event.

    See.
    You are looking at the world through formulas and laws since the time Ainstain.But one should realize that by then 100 years have passed and many things changed.See the internet properly and there certainly will find articles about the negative energy from real scientists.
    I did not invent it but I have no problem to accept.
    Because when I take a look as he looked at the world and the universe of my youth and now is a terrible difference.
    Everything develops and we must accept it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Your Mama! GiantEvil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Vancouver, Wa
    Posts
    2,280
    I was some of the mud that got to sit up and look around.
    Lucky me. Lucky mud.
    -Kurt Vonnegut Jr.-
    Cat's Cradle.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •