Customer Discussions > Science forum

anyone got an estimate for the total energy in the universe ?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 90 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Mar 7, 2012 10:35:05 AM PST
how much energy does the universe contain.
dont worry about dark stuff.
just the obvious energy needed for stars and matter which will be a lower bound for the total.

Posted on Mar 7, 2012 10:41:17 AM PST
Rev. Otter says:
i always figured its net energy was zero. but that's a philosophical, and not scientific, conclusion.

*shrug*

Posted on Mar 7, 2012 10:53:15 AM PST
mac says:
If you guess there are about 10^80 protons and multiply that by their rest mass, you should get a large number of electron volts.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 7, 2012 11:41:19 AM PST
mac

would tha tbe a good guess?

i would have guessed a much larger number of protons
plus neutrons and leptons etc.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 7, 2012 11:47:56 AM PST
mac says:
Upon further poking around the interweb I see the universe's mass estimated between 10^52 - 10^60 kg. Convert using E=mc^2 and you've got a range to play with.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 7, 2012 12:17:46 PM PST
Charlie T. says:
Zero. Negative energy of gravity balances the E=mc^^2 of mass.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 7, 2012 12:45:51 PM PST
"how much energy does the universe contain."

All of it.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 7, 2012 5:22:24 PM PST
mac

interesting
thanks for that

i didnt find it
would have guessed it was more

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 7, 2012 5:23:00 PM PST
charlie

not responsive

dont care if it is balanced
wanted to know how much it was

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 7, 2012 5:23:26 PM PST
conservea

ho ho ho
that is one answer

not useful
but truthful

Posted on Mar 7, 2012 10:58:38 PM PST
Re original post: Any determined number for this will perforce be a lower bound, as there are some parts of our universe which, because of speed of light issues, we cannot see.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 8, 2012 6:04:45 AM PST
Brian Curtis says:
Ditto. The last I heard, the total energy of the universe was estimated to be zero.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 8, 2012 6:27:32 PM PST
> dont care if it is balanced

Balanced means zero, and is actually quite important; if you are actually interested in the subject.

Posted on Mar 8, 2012 11:26:33 PM PST
Over 9000.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 9, 2012 8:34:32 PM PST
noname

i am interested in the energy that was required to implode the big bang
and which was used to condense into matter

dont care about anything that you think balances it

there is no balance
the universe is full of energy
and is expanding because of its effects

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 9, 2012 9:33:45 PM PST
tom kriske says:
frickin heavy dude! freeeeeeeeeckin heavy!!!

Posted on Mar 9, 2012 9:56:51 PM PST
noman says:
RE: Womper says (via other posters): "i am interested in the energy that was required to implode the big bang
and which was used to condense into matter

dont care about anything that you think balances it

there is no balance
the universe is full of energy
and is expanding because of its effects "

**Unfortunately your post shows you don't know enough to ask the right questions, let alone understand the answers. The following is an example of the kinds of papers you will find regarding the energy state of the universe

" On the Zero-Energy Universe.
Authors: Berman, Marcelo
Source: International Journal of Theoretical Physics; Nov2009, Vol. 48 Issue 11, p3278-3286, 9p
Subject Terms:
*COSMOLOGY
*GENERAL relativity (Physics)
*ASTRONOMY
*EQUIVALENCE principle (Physics)
*RELATIVITY (Physics)
Author-Supplied Keywords:
Cosmology
Energy
General relativity
Pseudoquadrimomentum
Pseudotensors
Abstract:
We consider the energy of the Universe, from the pseudo-tensor point of view (Berman, M.Sc. thesis, 1981). We find zero values, when the calculations are well-done. The doubts concerning this subject are clarified, with the novel idea that the justification for the calculation lies in the association of the equivalence principle, with the nature of co-motional observers, as demanded in Cosmology. In Sect. 4, we give a novel calculation for the zero-total energy result."

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 10, 2012 4:42:32 PM PST
noman

and the universe exploded from the big bang
with zero energy

rotflmao
you know where you should put those tensors
your equations/models are wrong

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 11, 2012 1:10:01 AM PST
Charlie T. says:
4 plus -4 = 0

one trillion zillion plus (minus one trillion zillion) = 0

The total energy of he Universe is zero.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 11, 2012 1:11:26 AM PST
Charlie T. says:
There was zero energy required for the Big Bang, because of the balance you dismiss. It is possible to make a universe out of nothing. See books by Lee Smolin.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 11, 2012 6:17:47 AM PDT
whomper wrote:
"how much energy does the universe contain."
==================================
whomper,

Is that question more important to you than writing proper English?
and
Why are you asking, any way?

Posted on Mar 11, 2012 9:40:51 AM PDT
I think 5-Hour Energy violates the Laws of Thermodynamics.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 11, 2012 4:11:07 PM PDT
charlie

nutz

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 11, 2012 4:12:03 PM PDT
ro

only if you drink 5 of them a day

Posted on Mar 11, 2012 9:32:14 PM PDT
jpl says:
anyone [sic] got an estimate for the total energy in the universe ? [sic]

jpl: Precisely three pounds.
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Science forum

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Science forum
Participants:  22
Total posts:  90
Initial post:  Mar 7, 2012
Latest post:  Mar 27, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.

Search Customer Discussions