Forum:Zero-point energy (vacuum energy) versus dark energy
Zero-point energy (vacuum energy) versus dark energy[edit]
A point of contention here is whether zero-point energy and dark energy are related - while both of them are undetectable energies that permeate all of space, it must be understood that zero-point energy is in essence 'borrowed' from quantum fluctuations - as the energy used to create virtual particles and antiparticles must return to being energy at the lowest possible level - the 'zero point' - it cannot affect traditional matter and space as such. However, it can be possible that gravity's influence at the Planck scale of matter allows zero-point energy to in fact alter the speed of the universe's expansion.
Now that that nit-picky point is done with, it's entirely possible that the Combine does alter the physical laws of a space within its reactor, creating a sphere of volatile space-time (or simply a localized region which is in essence a part of another universe, one that has copious amounts of dark energy), and then utilizing the procedures as follows to create exotic particles. The increasing of quantum fluctuations in a local area could also be a result of changing physical law.
As for anti-mass condensation, that would assume that one would be creating particles of antimatter from negative energy, which makes sense if we include antiparticles under the heading of 'exotic'.
And finally, if Zero-point energy is borrowed and cannot be used, then how does the Gravity Gun work?
Answer: Gameplay necessity.
Agent1022 08:07, November 14, 2010 (UTC)
- I wonder how many people will actually read that without saying "...What?" Anyway, gameplay necessity is more or less a kind of mind-over-matter debacle. In this case, it's making the game fun and playable over making every single detail make perfect sense. In a nutshell, it's gameplay over realism. Most people simply accept the fact that it's typical of video games; it's a fantasy world where not everything- if anything- makes sense. XiaoXiaoMan 15:44, November 14, 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry about that - the way I read the article I felt that the author was equating dark energy and zero-point energy when proof that this is so is conjectural. No offense or indignance was intended, just scientific accuracy. Agent1022 08:25, November 15, 2010 (UTC)
