Does space bend In a pure vacuum ?

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by river, Dec 15, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. river

    Messages:
    14,518
    So far I have not found any proof that space bends in a pure vacuum. ( pure vacuum is defined as devoid of any quantum matter and/or smaller ).
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. river

    Messages:
    14,518
    I don't think that space " bends " at all ; it is the matter IN space that forms any geometry between the macroscopic forms such as the Sun and planet(s) .
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Gawdzilla Sama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,864
    Are you talking about curved space?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. river

    Messages:
    14,518
    Yes , absolutely .
     
  8. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,622
    And you would be correct. Spacetime has a curvature.

    In answer to your OP:
    If you were to isolate a volume of space between here and the Moon, say, one cubic metre, and ensure that there were no atoms in there, you could indeed measure the space time curvature within it. It would be as simple as placing a particle within the volume and watching that particle fall toward Earth under the influence of gravity. In an Einsteinian universe, gravity is the curvature of spacetime.
     
  9. river

    Messages:
    14,518
    Not good enough , want the whole of the volume of space between Macro-objects , suns and planetary , to be devoid , of anything atomic and further quantum and smaller , energy and/or quantum state .
     
  10. river

    Messages:
    14,518
    Inotherwords Dave , the volume of space between Earth and Moon , three dimensionaly, has NO energy nor matter form .
     
  11. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,622
    Well, you won't get that in our universe. Every cubic millimetre of space is pervaded with electromagnetic radiation. Even if it's dark as heck, it's still irradiated by the CMBR.
     
  12. river

    Messages:
    14,518

    And physical matter , from the macroscopic ; to the microscopic . Not just electromagnetic radiation .

    And the reason that any electromagnetic radiation exists is because of physical matter. Without physical matter , electromagnetic radiation would not exist .
     
  13. river

    Messages:
    14,518
    Moving on , back on the OP topic ; REMOVING all forms of energy and matter , no matter the scale of size , macro and micro in a defined space , this defined space is the distance to the moon and back , three dimensionally . 360° degrees .

    A Pure vacuum .

    In this pure vacuum , Does space bend , curve ? Could it ?
     
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2019
  14. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    34,574
    According to the general theory of relativity, spacetime is flat in the absence of any mass or energy.

    You've heard the saying, haven't you? "Matter tells spacetime how to curve..."
     
  15. geordief Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,369
    I see that is ** the saying .But should it really be "Mass tells spacetime how to curve..." since not all matter has mass ....or does it? (can massless particles also curve spacetime if they have energy?)

    Also can we say that it is not spacetime that curves (except when viewed in a model) but the spacetime distances that lengthen or shorten in proportion to the relationship between measured space and measured time?

    **not the "wrong" one running through my head though.It is the one with "mass" that I assumed it was.
     
    river likes this.
  16. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,622
    Well, depends on what you mean. Or what River means.

    Even if there was a complete absence of matter between Earth and Moon, the spacetime there would still have a curvature because of the nearby masses.
     
  17. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,622
    Since there was a epoch of the universe where it was only electromagnetic radiation, this is obviously not true.
     
  18. geordief Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,369
    Did one then have gravity (ie spacetime, apparently) with just em radiation ?
     
  19. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,622
    Presumably, yes. Gravity broke away from the symmetry first, so there would have been a period where gravity existed but particles had not yet sublimated from energy.
     
  20. geordief Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,369
    So the em field started almost symmetrical and was eased apart by gravity along lines of asymmetricality?

    I am not sure if "sublimated from energy" sounds right.

    Energy is a property of matter,I have heard and not a thing per se.
     
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2019
  21. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,059
    Please don't hijack the thread.
     
  22. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,622
    Sorry. You're right. That should have read EMR.
     
  23. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,642
    False. If your assertion were true, matter-antimatter imbalance could never happen, and planets, stars, galaxies etc. could never exist. Nothing in QED allows a matter-antimatter asymmetry.
    The very early universe is believed to have been dominated by a quark-gluon plasma, and an as yet unknown BSM interaction operated there to yield an eventual one baryon per ~ 10^10 photons. Leptons (mostly electrons and neutrinos) and DM make up additional portions whose estimated numerical values can easily be found with a web search.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page