The Universe Is Not Based On Converting Energy To Matter

[HydrogenBond]

If you look at the universe, there is a net conversion of matter to energy, such as the fusion within stars. Our universe is not based on energy converting to matter, in any net way, although this direction can occur on a smaller scale. 

 

What this basic observation tells me is , energy is at a lower potential than matter in our universe since potential goes from higher to lower. This, in turn, means that the energy is really the ground state of the universe, compared to matter. Matter is at the top of the hill, and rolls down to the bottom to become energy, via the forces of nature; to use imagery. 

 

If we add to this, energy moves as the speed of light, this observation suggests that the speed of light is the ground state of the universe, not inertial reference. The speed of light is the same in all inertial references, while the matter in all references converts to energy, to reach the same energy reference at C. Laws of physics are the same in all references. 

 

Inertial reference, such as observations from the earth, are actually at higher potential than the C ground state of energy, due to be inertial and matter. The practical problem this creates for science is our inertial reference, contains potential, that a C reference ground state does not contain.

 

An analogy is using the top of a mountain as the ground state, instead of sea level, C-level.  This mountain top reference gives the impression of extra energy than allows us to hang glide down the mountain to C-level, that is not part of the ground state at sea level; C-level.

 

This top of the mountain analogy, for earth reference, has to take into account energy that is relative to our reference and not the ground state. This means we will need to include a hang glider theory as an addendum to our model of the universe, not needed by a C-level ground state view. 

 

The discussion of universe recycle is made more difficult because but the current theory forces one to add hang glider energy which is not needed if you chose a C ground state. The C ground state does not use or need extra energy to make it work. It may look to simple because I don't need to account for reference energy due to a poor choice of reference. 

Edited March 19, 2015 by HydrogenBond

[Buffy]

Fusion does create matter. It's probably one of the most significant things it does, dear. Without it we would still have nothing by Hydrogen in the universe, but thanks to fusion we have all of the higher elements (including all those horrible "unnatural" ones created by humans).

 

 

We’re made of star stuff, :phones:

Buffy

[HydrogenBond]

Fusion does create matter. It's probably one of the most significant things it does, dear. Without it we would still have nothing by Hydrogen in the universe, but thanks to fusion we have all of the higher elements (including all those horrible "unnatural" ones created by humans).

 

 

We’re made of star stuff, :phones:

Buffy

 

 

I agree, however, the net direction is mass/matter giving off energy and not energy converting to mass and matter.

 

The universe is mostly hydrogen, with the fusion into all the element up to iron, giving off energy. Atoms higher than iron require energy input because these are endothermic. So mass/matter can form from energy, but this is a tiny fraction of the total. I was talking of the net matter to energy with the reverse possible but more of a tag along. 

 

The C-reference is not the same as an energy reference, even though photon move at C. Energy, like photons, moves at the speed of light. However they are also part of inertial reference, since their waves will red and blue shift, depending on reference and motion. Photon type energy is half in C and half in inertial; has two legs.

 

The C-level ground state is not impacted by inertial; zero state does not change. This is different from energy. Energy, due to the inertial leg, net lowers its own potential with the C ground state, via the expansion of the universe. The red shift of universal energy lowers energy potential; weaker and weaker quanta. 

 

Gravity is simply mass/matter attempting to reach the C-reference in a different way.The clumping of matter caused by gravity, causes space-time to contract toward the general direction of C; point-instant. The release of energy, due to gravitational work, loss of entropy, forces and fusion, lowers the potential with C, while the expansion of energy out of the space-time well, allows the energy to lower its potential with C-level. The universal expansion will takes energy one step further. 

Edited March 19, 2015 by HydrogenBond

[HydrogenBond]

Could to topic be renamed, Using C reference as the ground state for Physics theory? The way you worded it, sounds ambiguous with respect to observation. The new title better clarifies my thesis. Matter/mass to energy  was just my opening observation to justify my approach. 

Edited March 19, 2015 by HydrogenBond

[HydrogenBond]

Since matter to energy; or "exothermic" is the net direction of matter in the universe, does choosing matter and inertial reference,  as the ground state, impact theory? Say you assume the hill top is the zero point. Since this is on a hill and has potential energy we don't know about, what will happen to our theory? Eventually you will start to see inconsistencies, and will need to postulate ways to explain the extra potential in the assumed zero reference point; whoops!

 

For example, if I was looking at the world from a moving train; at higher potential than the station (kinetic energy), the landscape would appear to be at higher potential, because everything seems to be moving. 

 

From the station, the mountains and the landscape are not moving. The net effect is we will need to compensate with fudge factors, when we become conscious of the problem our moving or higher energy reference choice has created. The station does not have this internal energy, so the energy balance is easier without the same fudge requirements. 

Edited March 19, 2015 by HydrogenBond

[OldBill]

HB ...Am I glad this Forum is in the 'Beyond Strange' category - cuz this occurred to me once - after way too many beers, while closing down a bar someplace:

 

Contrary to your assertion, I think it's possible that our Universe may very well be Based on Converting Energy into Matter (and Antimatter) and - a moment or two after that - into one helluva matter-scatter mess:  One that it is still in the process of having to clean up....  On the premise that our universe is the domain of a single 'energy organism' of some type, it is possible that it thrives and grows mainly by surrounding and capturing other (smaller) energy organisms, then compressing them until they resonate at a 'harmonic' that facilitates their being directly assimilated.  They just kinda slide right in - and "our energy organism" becomes a little bit bigger/fatter with each capture.

 

Now, let's further imagine that our friendly neighborhood 'organism' got ahold of some 'Bad Haggis' one day - a passing energy organism that it captured, and then started its routine of compressing and squeezing and crunching, and all that.... but no 'harmonic', no sliding right in, no assimilation.  Finally the poor thing gets squeezed so tightly that it stops moving altogether, and 'drops out of warp' so to speak, being now a very rigidly compacted tiny little ball of pure matter and antimatter. 

 

Oops! What's our favorite 'organism' supposed to do now?  This is definitely not what it wanted,     Now, of course, it has no choice: 

 

In what could only be described as an "Oh ****" moment, it releases its grip... and WHAM !!  ....  And it's been working round the clock ever since, cleaning up that mess for weeks now (or about 14 billion years, depending on where you're standing).  Night and day, piecing together little beantsy matter things to make mass, and then assembling the mass into big balls, and squeezing them until they ignite.....and finally that 'Bad Haggis' is slowly becoming energy again, (one fusion event at a time), only this time the useful, readily assimilated kind.   

 

So, energy into matter, matter into mass, mass into energy.  Has to be some explanation as to why this mess came about in the first place..  And I'm betting it'll be a while before it happens again, our favorite 'energy organism' having learned the hard way to just spit out some Bad Haggis, before crunching down on it too far. ....

And I'm pretty sure it'll be a while before I close down any more bars, too .... The end.

Edited March 24, 2015 by OldBill

[HydrogenBond]

HB ...Am I glad this Forum is in the 'Beyond Strange' category - cuz this occurred to me once - after way too many beers, while closing down a bar someplace:

 

So, energy into matter, matter into mass, mass into energy.  Has to be some explanation as to why this mess came about in the first place..  And I'm betting it'll be a while before it happens again, our favorite 'energy organism' having learned the hard way to just spit out some Bad Haggis, before crunching down on it too far. ....

And I'm pretty sure it'll be a while before I close down any more bars, too .... The end.

 

The beginning of the universe may have been energy to matter, but after that, the potential that was created caused the universe to become exothermic. We can use energy to wind a clock, but after that, the clock unwinds in an exothermic way. 

 

In particle accelerators, matter will form from energy. An interesting observation is although protons are only made of a few quarks, accelerator/colliders can make all the quarks using protons. This is because the protons are detonated back to energy. This burn energy, plus the energy added by the magnetic fields, plus the kinetic energy, combine to reform matter in an even wider variety of quarks than we began. This new variety is not as stable as the proton. Somehow the proton is wired in a way that allows it to maintain stability. But it can be detonated under extreme activation energy. 

 

Edited March 24, 2015 by HydrogenBond