The Energy of Empty Space != Zero

Raindeer writes "Lawrence Krauss (well-known physicist and author of The Science of Star Trek) invited a group of 21 cosmologists, experimentalists, theorists, and particle physicists and cosmologists. Stephen Hawking came; three Nobel laureates, Gerard 'tHooft, David Gross, Frank Wilczek etc. He wrote about the conclusions of this session in Edge; in short: 'there appears to be energy of empty space that isn't zero! This flies in the face of all conventional wisdom in theoretical particle physics. It is the most profound shift in thinking, perhaps the most profound puzzle, in the latter half of the 20th century. And it may be the first half of the 21st century, or maybe go all the way to the 22nd century. Because, unfortunately, I happen to think we won't be able to rely on experiment to resolve this problem.'"

Zero-point energy?

[TheRaven64]

It sounds like they are talking about zero-point energy, the energy in the quantum vacuum. This has been known about by theoretical physicists for some time, and has even made it into popular science fiction. There is some debate, I believe, as to whether it is possible to extract this energy in a usable form, but its existence is hardly new.

oops..

[doowy]

I got half way through the article and stopped. He isn't saying anything really at all.

I don't think this is a discovery of any sort.. I think it is just a guy bragging that he had a nice audience at some conference for which he gave a presentation regarding the non-zero energy of empty space.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this has been known for some time and is even explained our current models.

His presentation seemed to be very anecdotal, I don't think he's claiming to have discovered anything - in fact, I don't think he is claiming to even understand what he is talking about, he's just providing some anecdotal perspective on it.

P.S. I don't claim to understand it myself.. :)

Just because it has energy...

[everphilski]

... doesn't mean it is usable. The pen sitting on your desk has energy, but I don't see you jumping to extract energy from it.

The exciting thing here is that empty space has **some** energy potential. Less energy potential than a lump of mass just sitting on a desk or a burning coal in a fire, but **some** energy potential.

Re:Science Fluxion

[starseeker]

"Is there a distinction between faith you can't prove to yourself because it's not proveable (metaphysics), and faith you're too dumb to prove?"

Yes. The latter has a hope of being successfully challenged, and the former does not. That distinction is what distinguishes a scientific question (even if not currently testable) from a religious one (a certain state's school system's habit of redefining words nonwithstanding).

Re:Science Fluxion

[Anonymous Coward]

Belief: what you know that you could prove to yourself but have not

How can you possibly know that you could prove something to yourself if you haven't gone to the trouble of actually proving it to yourself? Unless you take it on faith of course. Your definitions are silly.

Dark matter found at last?

[Weaselmancer]

Well, it seems to me that if space itself has a nonzero energy, you may be able to stop looking for that extra matter/energy that is missing from the big bang. Most of the universe is...well, space. That might account for that missing 90%, right?

Couple of problems with the bug trap analogy

[Anonymous Coward]

When the density of bugs on the inside of the trap equals the density
of bugs on the outside, then the likelyhood of a bug entering the
trap is the same as the likelyhood of a bug exiting. So no, no free power
there.

And if the trap has some sort of guidance mechanism (like a funnel) to
guide the bug into the trap, then that guidance consists of energy being
expended BY the trap ON the bug. So again, no free energy.