Exploring the Possibility That No Part of the Universe is Empty

In summary, the book "THE HOLOGRAPHIC UNIVERSE" suggests that empty space is only called empty because we are not able to perceive it. However, there are arguments such as the gravitational pull and spectroscopy that suggest otherwise. These methods indicate that space is not completely empty, but rather has trace amounts of elements such as hydrogen and helium. Therefore, it can be concluded that while space may seem empty to us, it is not truly empty.
  • #1
TRUGONOWFOR
5
0
I have just recently read a book entitled THE HOLOGRAPHIC UNIVERSE in which it is suggested that what we now call empty space is only called empty because we are like fish that cannot see the water they swim through. Is there a reason to consider that any area of the universe is empty?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Well... there is always the gravitational argument: mass attracts mass. So if a region of space does not attract other mass, then you can assume it's empty (or rather: not very full). Also, from spectroscopy outside the visible range (mainly infrared) you can make a pretty good guess as to how many elements there are in "empty space", as well as which elements they are. I believe that the real "empty" places have about 100 hydrogen molecules per qubic kilometer (correct me if I'm wrong!) and also trace amounts of helium. Not a lot!
 
  • #3
It depends on what you mean by "blind." Our eyes aren't the only thing we can use to see. It also depends on what you mean by "empty" because space is generally considered to not be completely empty, just ALMOST completely empty.
 

1. What is meant by the term "empty" in this context?

In this context, "empty" refers to the absence of any matter or energy. This includes particles, atoms, and even electromagnetic radiation.

2. How is it possible for there to be no empty space in the universe?

According to the laws of quantum mechanics, empty space is not actually empty. It is filled with particles and anti-particles that constantly pop in and out of existence. Additionally, even the vacuum of space contains energy and fields that interact with particles.

3. What implications does this theory have for our understanding of the universe?

If it is true that no part of the universe is empty, it would challenge our current understanding of space and matter. It could also have implications for the theories of gravity and dark matter, as well as our understanding of the Big Bang.

4. How can we test or prove this theory?

One way to test this theory is through experiments that study the properties of empty space, such as measuring the vacuum energy or searching for evidence of particles popping in and out of existence. Additionally, observations of the cosmic microwave background radiation could also provide insights into the density of matter and energy in the universe.

5. What are the potential implications for the future of science if this theory is true?

If this theory is proven to be true, it would require a major shift in our understanding of the universe and could open up new avenues for scientific exploration. It could also lead to the development of new technologies and possibly even a better understanding of the origin and nature of the universe.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
707
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
736
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
5
Views
890
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
382
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top