Notices
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Vacumm Energy Magnet

  1. #1 Vacumm Energy Magnet 
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    3,420
    Could we theorectically create a vacuum energy magnet to draw in vacuum energy as power source. Also is there a relationship between vacuum energy occuring in empty space and gravity created from filled space?

    Could gravity actually be an absence of another energy form rather than a force in it's own right?
    This would help to explain why the higgs hasn't been found.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    7
    there is no medium so quite diff


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3 can a gas be used for conducting current? 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    7
    can a gas be used for conducting current?
    creating electric field ,voltages,and finally for application somewhere??
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post
    Could we theorectically create a vacuum energy magnet to draw in vacuum energy as power source. Also is there a relationship between vacuum energy occuring in empty space and gravity created from filled space?
    The vacuum energy is the lowest energy state of the vacuum. You can only extract energy from something if there is a lower energy state to go to - e.g. extracting energy from hot steam by cooling it down. There is no "down" from the vacuum.

    As far as I know, there is no connection between this and gravity.

    This would help to explain why the higgs hasn't been found.
    The Higg's mechanism doesn't, directly, have anything to do with gravity.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    3,420
    Forgive my lack of knowledge on this, but isn't vacuum energy where particles spontaneously pop into being inside empty space, if not it is this energy I am really talking about. I was pondering the idea of trying to draw in more of these particles than would normally occur naturally. Imagine if you will that it is raining on a field and you want to collect the water, that is pretty much what I am suggesting with the spontaneous particles popping in and out of existance.


    Also I thought supposed theorectical 'Higgs-Boseon' is a particle that CERN are desperate to find as it is needed to support the theory that mass is gained by matter passing through a higgs field and gaining higgs to then have mass and exert gravity.

    I was just speculating on the idea that instead of matter gaining something that gives it mass, the idea that matter has lost something, or exists in a state which means it's gained mass as result and is therefore now far more suseptable from the gravity of other matter.

    Also postulating the idea that rather than mass be result of a particle, that mass is result of state in which matter exists as opposed to the state in which mass less particles exist.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Western US
    Posts
    2,896
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post
    Forgive my lack of knowledge on this, but isn't vacuum energy where particles spontaneously pop into being inside empty space, if not it is this energy I am really talking about.
    That's not vacuum energy. It's a description of how the Heisenberg uncertainty principle allows for "virtual particles" to come into (and go out of) existence. Particles can indeed spontaneously pop into existence, and then disappear, after having lived a very short time. By "short" is meant really, really, really short: The product of the particle lifetime and the energy "borrowed" to create it, must be small compared to Planck's constant.

    I was pondering the idea of trying to draw in more of these particles than would normally occur naturally. Imagine if you will that it is raining on a field and you want to collect the water, that is pretty much what I am suggesting with the spontaneous particles popping in and out of existance.
    Your idea is a cousin of the idea underpinning "Maxwell's Demon." If the Demon existed, we could sort gas molecules according to their velocities, and thus segregate all the hot ones in one box, and all the cold ones in another. From that temperature difference, we could run a heat engine and generate power. That fallacy is known as a perpetual motion machine of the second kind (it need not directly violate conservation of energy, but entropy is driven downward -- the wrong way). It turns out that this great idea fails because one can't ignore the intelligent agent's physical properties. Your idea fails in part for the same reason. You can't assume that you can collect at zero entropy and energy cost all the virtual particles (thus making them real), and thus extract net work from them.

    All that is a roundabout way of confirming what Strange has already told you -- the vacuum state is the lowest energy state, so you can't extract net energy from it.

    Murphy does not let you win. Sorry.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    3,420
    SED suggests it may actually be possible to remove energy without effecting the minimum-energy or ground states.
    Last edited by Ascended; April 26th, 2012 at 01:58 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post
    SED suggests it may actually be possible to remove energy without effecting the minimum-energy or ground states.
    That would be tantamount to a violation of the principle of conservation of energy...not very likely IMO.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    what is SED?
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    3,420
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    what is SED?
    SED is stochastic electrodynamics, it's basically a different take on classical electrodynamics.

    It is used to the speculate on the possibility of a classical lorentz invariant radiation field having statistical properties similer to that of the electromagnetic zero point field of quantum electrodynamics.
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    3,420
    Does SED actually have scientific credibility.
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Is the Human Being a Magnet?
    By Scuba360 in forum Physics
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: December 1st, 2010, 02:43 PM
  2. Magnet repel magnet why not use them in electromagnetic gen
    By Zebus in forum Personal Theories & Alternative Ideas
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: March 19th, 2009, 02:56 PM
  3. Magnet Question
    By leohopkins in forum Physics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: January 19th, 2008, 06:26 AM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: May 18th, 2007, 06:30 PM
  5. Magnet question....
    By Dimension in forum Physics
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: August 28th, 2006, 12:41 PM
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
  •