Consider the quantum vacuum, with virtual particles popping in and out of existance ...
Consider now that each of these virtual particles has some directed motion (during its brief existance), all in a common direction ...
Then one could say that the vacuum posesses some momentum (per unit volume) or in other words that the vacuum is "moving".
I know very well that this possibility is usually excluded from the start in every discussion on the vacuum, but is there really any reason, based on established physics, to exclude such a possibility ?
Suppose we could really make the vacuum to carry momentum, then we could make a nice propulsion system for spacecrafts (or cars if you like), without any mass leaving it ..
The vacuum has no prefered direction, since the motion is totally randomised over all points of space-time and over all momenta. Lorentz shifting your point of view (ie moving to a different velocity from when you first looked at the vacuum) doesn't do anything, you still see particles appearing and disappearing at all points in space-time over all momenta with the same distrubution.
QUOTE (buddha+Oct 11 2006, 08:03 PM)
Suppose we could really make the vacuum to carry momentum, then we could make a nice propulsion system for spacecrafts
The so called Heim's propulsion is using such effect. It's utilizing the frame dragging effect of massive rotating gyroscope, which makes the local vortex of such vacuum like octopus. Such vortex can be dragged by magnetic filed, thus causing a reactive force to the magnet. You can click to the pictures bellow to see it in original resolution.
The so called Heim's propulsion is using such effect. It's utilizing the frame dragging effect of massive rotating gyroscope, which makes the local vortex of such vacuum like octopus. Such vortex can be dragged by magnetic filed, thus causing a reactive force to the magnet. You can click to the pictures bellow to see it in original resolution.
QUOTE (AlphaNumeric+Oct 11 2006, 06:43 PM)
The vacuum has no prefered direction, since the motion is totally randomised over all points of space-time and over all momenta. Lorentz shifting your point of view (ie moving to a different velocity from when you first looked at the vacuum) doesn't do anything, you still see particles appearing and disappearing at all points in space-time over all momenta with the same distrubution.
If one states as an axiom that the vacuum has no preferred direction, then the discussion is closed and no net momentum is possible. But who says that the vacuum can, under certain conditions, not have a preferred direction if this is induced in some way ?
If one states as an axiom that the vacuum has no preferred direction, then the discussion is closed and no net momentum is possible. But who says that the vacuum can, under certain conditions, not have a preferred direction if this is induced in some way ?
Budda
You might find this of interest. Stochastic Electrodynamics Theory has delved into this field. Here is a link to a site by one of the men who worked on it. http://www.calphysics.org/index.html
There is more on this site about the subject than just SED theory, though research into SED is what lead me there.
You might find this of interest. Stochastic Electrodynamics Theory has delved into this field. Here is a link to a site by one of the men who worked on it. http://www.calphysics.org/index.html
There is more on this site about the subject than just SED theory, though research into SED is what lead me there.
1.
Now it is considered that the Universe, as an absolute frame of reference
is in a condition of T = 2,7K (rests of relic radiation of the Big Bang ).
But, the relic radiation is extended and in the future will change
and decrease down to Т=0К.
2.
We cannot reach T=0K because it is Universe of
heat and radiation death ( E=0).
3.
Death for us is an end of everything,
enter in the Empire of NOTHING.
4.
Classic physics says :
In NOTHING, in T=0K ( Energy =0) the moving of particles stops.
Quantum physics.
a)
Quantum physics says:
In NOTHING the moving is possible but only for “virtual particles”.
Quantum physics respects the Classic physics very much.
Quantum physics does not want to quarrel with Classic physics
therefore it says modestly:
In NOTHING the Energy is not zero, but approximately zero.
To say so is like as some gynecologist says:
“She is approximately a pregnant woman”.
5.
In the Empire of NOTHING:
T=0K.
Energy =0.
Time=0.
But “virtual particles” exist.
6.
Why do the particles of Classic physics stop its moving in T=0K?
Why don,t the particles of Quantum physics stop its moving in T=0K?
Maybe they are absolute different particles?
=====================
The Vacuum and the Electron.
All know, that an electron is not a firm sphere. All know, that its form can be changed.
But nobody understands the borders of the change of the geometrical form of the electron.
So, what are the borders of this change? Quantum theory gives an answer to this question.
It says that at the interaction of the electron with the vacuum, the energy and mass of the
electron become infinite. Physics does not understand what to do with infinite sizes
and therefore have thought up "a method of renormalization", a method
"to sweep the dust under the carpet" / Feynman./
This method is abstract.
But the situation can be understood another way.
Electrons, having the geometrical form of a sphere,
lose their volume (density) and turn into an indefinitely flat circle.
In this is the reason for the occurrence of infinite sizes for the electron.
But in physics we know only one particle which has the form of a flat circle.
It is a quantum of light which flies rectilinearly with speed c= 1.
Therefore, the electron turns into a quantum of light.
Therefore, the electron and /or a quantum of light
is the same particle in different states.
* * *
http://www.socratus.com
Now it is considered that the Universe, as an absolute frame of reference
is in a condition of T = 2,7K (rests of relic radiation of the Big Bang ).
But, the relic radiation is extended and in the future will change
and decrease down to Т=0К.
2.
We cannot reach T=0K because it is Universe of
heat and radiation death ( E=0).
3.
Death for us is an end of everything,
enter in the Empire of NOTHING.
4.
Classic physics says :
In NOTHING, in T=0K ( Energy =0) the moving of particles stops.
Quantum physics.
a)
Quantum physics says:
In NOTHING the moving is possible but only for “virtual particles”.
Quantum physics respects the Classic physics very much.
Quantum physics does not want to quarrel with Classic physics
therefore it says modestly:
In NOTHING the Energy is not zero, but approximately zero.
To say so is like as some gynecologist says:
“She is approximately a pregnant woman”.
5.
In the Empire of NOTHING:
T=0K.
Energy =0.
Time=0.
But “virtual particles” exist.
6.
Why do the particles of Classic physics stop its moving in T=0K?
Why don,t the particles of Quantum physics stop its moving in T=0K?
Maybe they are absolute different particles?
=====================
The Vacuum and the Electron.
All know, that an electron is not a firm sphere. All know, that its form can be changed.
But nobody understands the borders of the change of the geometrical form of the electron.
So, what are the borders of this change? Quantum theory gives an answer to this question.
It says that at the interaction of the electron with the vacuum, the energy and mass of the
electron become infinite. Physics does not understand what to do with infinite sizes
and therefore have thought up "a method of renormalization", a method
"to sweep the dust under the carpet" / Feynman./
This method is abstract.
But the situation can be understood another way.
Electrons, having the geometrical form of a sphere,
lose their volume (density) and turn into an indefinitely flat circle.
In this is the reason for the occurrence of infinite sizes for the electron.
But in physics we know only one particle which has the form of a flat circle.
It is a quantum of light which flies rectilinearly with speed c= 1.
Therefore, the electron turns into a quantum of light.
Therefore, the electron and /or a quantum of light
is the same particle in different states.
* * *
http://www.socratus.com
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.