[P-man]

So conservation of energy in mass. Does that mean a vaccum cannot conserve energy?

[xiankai]

a perfect vacuum still has zero point energy in a zero point field, the minimum energy that cannot be removed.

it means rather; that energy can be converted to mass and vice versa.

one shouldn't think of energy and mass as seperate; they are one and the same, and nature favours no specific state.

[P-man]

That was what I was trying to explain. Energy is conserved through mass, which makes them, as you said, basically one thing. Unless you seperate them, of course.

[english]

So if matter and energy are both in duality and neither is thus created or destroyed, then this must mean that the Universe began with a fixed amount of energy that has been continuously recycling itself ever since?

[Mitch]

KV: Yes, and no. Depending who you ask. Most physicists will say the amount of energy the universe had at the beginning is what determined the fundamental constants in our universe, speed of light, etc. If the universe had different initial condition then we would have completely different fundamental constants; that is what string theory is concerned about and occurs in the 9th dimension.

[Will]

If the universe had different initial condition then we would have completely different fundamental constants; that is what string theory is concerned about and occurs in the 9th dimension.

You mean the 8th dimension?
(consequently occurs in 9th and 10th dimensions too)

[Mitch]

Sure, why not.

[edwinksl]

I don't know why, but I just have this idea that the Universe started off with zero energy. This idea probably pops out because of all the negative energies, e.g. gravitational potential energies, electrical potential energies, that I see when I was revising my physics.

[english]

I don't know why, but I just have this idea that the Universe started off with zero energy. This idea probably pops out because of all the negative energies, e.g. gravitational potential energies, electrical potential energies, that I see when I was revising my physics.

And where's your paper on this?

 

[edwinksl]

I don't know why, but I just have this idea that the Universe started off with zero energy. This idea probably pops out because of all the negative energies, e.g. gravitational potential energies, electrical potential energies, that I see when I was revising my physics.

And where's your paper on this?

 

I have no paper on this hahaha. I am not even in university yet.

[FeLiXe]

that's a cool thought. keep it secret, work it out and publish :-)

but I guess the mass of any atom equals much more than the bonding energy of electrons and nucleons

I am still wondering though: what if two particles appear whose bonding energy corresponds to their masses?

[pengli]

?

[Borek]

?

Please read forum rules, especially point 6.

[Donaldson Tan]

?

It means "I don't think so"