Something out of nothing

If matter reduces to pure energy

then energy is all that exists

if all that exists manifests itself onto observable matter

then something is created from something

if the universe is something then it is created from something

if something is therefore created from something

eventually all the things induce to let us deduce:


that something is created not out of everything but out of all


it is just that we are something also.

This post reminded me of a book I finished not too long ago. Angels & Demons by Dan Brown. Have you read it? It's pretty neat. As for the topic, I don't know much about this stuff. But it's cool, nonetheless.

Ya know that sounds like that relativity stuff?
Hmm . . . does relativity claim that all matter is energy?
Matter and energy are not the same thing! Matter is the form of energy?
well that may be closer to it, eh? After all, the emergence of simultance equations implies both organization and one to one correspondancy neccessary for closure.
that they exist as a set of values which give equality to all equations simultaneously.
Energy & mass is more action/reaction statement . . . matter exist therefore mass & energy exist in various forms . . . life is one of those forms?

When relativity and quantum mechanics join we'll be able to say. Until then the good thing is we can keep churning the wheel. What I'm trying to see is a fuzzy picture of where all this scinetific progress is going and trying to cut all sloppy meat off the new age lunacy that has clung to the backbone of what is otherwise objective imagination.

Matter exists and energy exists. To me it depends how you look at things as to in which order they form. From the small to the big I would say it is energy to mass. And from the big to the small I would say it is mass to energy. In much the same way that we can describe (some? things, rightly, as either a wave or a particle and be right either way, I think this equally applies here.

Yes, one could say that the function of existence is stated as having mass and occuping space => inertial mass [resistance to motion or change in motion] & it's motion. The form of energy exisist as stated by Relativiity but should not be confused by the associated mathematical form derived by our logic? Which came first the motion of the masses or the related fields that they form? Mass & energy exist in various forms although we may change their form . . . or perhaps it is their form that we exist?

Looking at another thread , eminded me of this thread. Noting that the 'Theory of Relativity' extended that 'energy existed in forms' . . . a conception of energy as related to the source. Chemical, Light, radio frequency (rf) => electromagnetic ; etc. But closure extends that these forms are components within our existense . . . for an alternate reality exist then it extist relative to our existence & is a component of our existense. Like the flow of energy (motion) " equality to all (equations) forms simultaneously" As in the orbit of the moon, the law of motion gives a static aspect, percieved as a man's face while the aspect of dynamic is shown in the inclination of it's orbit relative to the earth's spin and the earth/sun orbit, the seasons.

quote:

---

Matter exists and energy exists. To me it depends how you look at things as to in which order they form.

---

Very good incite, we might think that if E = m(c square) then higher (energy) frequency would produce pure energy; the upper lim => pure energy therefore the lower lim => pure mass? But note that as frequency decreeases the space (volume) it occupies increases so that the lower lim => void?

I havent forgotten this thread I just have no comment to make because its too damn hard to give any reasonable thoughts on top of yours'.

Ahh . . . I would give you Thanks for your contributions . . .

Would it be to much, I would point out a . . . helpful indulgence on my part?
It is a little out of topic . . . Absolute Zero?
what is temperature? the minimal (lowest value) energy configuration of matter (molecular form) => lowest resonant level.
Matter has mass & occupies space.
The atomic particles (mass) have moment therefore store energy as bonds [orbital configurations] then energy is stored in various forms in its molecular form. The ambient temperature of its environmental existence whether In the sun or the earth or moon determine their volume in space?

good point.

the subatomic particles spin around. The more temperature they have the faster they get? that sounds like kinetic energy or momentum. So each temperature determines the voulme of the space to go faster? I think this question refers to the subatomic activity rather than its attribute to volumetric space. Nonetheless it is important because it could suggest that energy is a precusor to mass. To lead this back, my question would be what is the temperature of a vaccuum? In theory it would be absolute zero, but thats not practical because you still have electromagnetic radiation in space. It is the presence of matter that therefore has a temperature. So, temperature is an attribute of matter as much as it is energy supplying matter. That's my feeling anyway; I just wonder if this borders on mass-energy equivalnce. Thats an intersting word actually equi-valence- literally the equal character of two or more propeties varying in a different aspect.

quote:

---

To lead this back, my question would be what is the temperature of a vaccuum? In theory it would be absolute zero, but thats not practical because you still have electromagnetic radiation in space. It is the presence of matter that therefore has a temperature.

---

Ahh . . Nice The Void is deviod of matter therefore the void is separate from space? Does not the presents of energy (fields) radiation => mass?

quote:

---

So, temperature is an attribute of matter as much as it is energy supplying matter. That's my feeling anyway; I just wonder if this borders on mass-energy equivalnce.

---

then STP exist relative to the attributes of matter & therefore the energy form (configuration) within the system?

I dont know why i am saying anything. Cause it makes me look completly stupid compared to you guys but oh well.

If EVERYTHING is made up of Matter or Energy then how can there be a void? And how can you make something out of nothing if EVERYTHING is made up of Matter or Energy?
And is our nothing really something?
Is it that we dont have the technology to look at even smaller things than the smallest elements known to man?
So could it be that there is something even more basic and small that makes up ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING?

(Confuse is being unsure. I am not confused. Just plain lost)

Well don't feel alone as you are probably in the majority.
Science says that matter exist? No, We percieved that matter existed . . . science only defines an organized, logical (?) concepts of how & why know actions take place . . . mater exist therefore : it has mass [inertial resisstance] & state of motion.
http://www.captaincynic.com/thread/69562/two-universes-huh-one-particle-
theory.htm

quote:

---

If EVERYTHING is made up of Matter or Energy then how can there be a void?

---

The Greek theory of the atomos, postulated that the material substance (matter) could be subdivided into parts (particles) like rocks being ground into sand. The end results would be a point at which could be no longer subdivided [molecular because of compounds]. They thought that these atoms would form the individual composition of that matter. Science instead found that the atoms of elements formed compounds and that the elements themselves could be subdivided further as separate particles. But these particles do not have the same characterizetics as the base elements {compounds}. They thought to an extent that these atomos of matter would be unique to that form of matter whch defines the molecular state of compound substances & elements.
The notion of equivalency of mass & energy,Einstiens original statement was presented in the context of particle theory. That that mass is constitutes graviation mass & has the attribute of inertia. Electromagnetic waves were considered to be radio frequency oscillations & was related as a concept to charged (-) particles in motion within the framework of the individual atomic [molecular] structure. One problem of the atomic theory was considerations that what kept the atomic particles from spinning into the center colasping the atom?

quote:

---

huh,so that is where absolute zero comes into play

---

For every action there must be an equal & opposite react. The electrons [outside the nucleus don't enter (?) or desend into the nucleus therefore there must be an equal & opposite force acting as a barrier? The closed shell theory of the Periodic Table extends this same principle. In the case of the atomic particles, the appearence of positrons may indicate that total separation doesn't truely exist?

quote:

---

So could it be that there is something even more basic and small that makes up ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING?

---

An exention of the electromagnetic wave would subjectively indicate that the least particle would have the shortest wavelength therefore as the wavelength approaches zero the frequency reaches infinite and therfore exist as pure energy . . . but because it has no motion, it exist as pure mass at rest. => matter.

But where does anti-matter and dark matter fit in to all this?
I'm asking cturtle because you obviously have some interest and knowledge in all this particle physics stuff.