The discrepancy of 120 orders of magnitude between the observed energy density of the vacuum and that predicted from manipulations of quantum assumptions has been considered as the “worst prediction in physics”. By ...The discrepancy of 120 orders of magnitude between the observed energy density of the vacuum and that predicted from manipulations of quantum assumptions has been considered as the “worst prediction in physics”. By employing abbreviated quantum “natural units” the predicted density is 2.9 × 10120 greater than the ~10-9 J/m3 estimated by current measurements. However a comparable order of magnitude discrepancy for energy, 6 × 10120, emerges when the total calculated force within the universe is distributed across its width. The energy density within the vacuum should be ~10111 J/m3. Because the emergence of the total force value required the square of the cut off frequency for Zero Point Fluctuations, the discrepancy could be considered as an artifact of temporal sampling, that is, the implicit temporal increments from which the estimates were derived. The identity of the predicted vacuum energy density from counting modes and energy density from quantum theory and that obtained from Newtonian Force applied across the universe could be a considered example of ∑n = n, which is one condition for a holographic state.展开更多
文摘The discrepancy of 120 orders of magnitude between the observed energy density of the vacuum and that predicted from manipulations of quantum assumptions has been considered as the “worst prediction in physics”. By employing abbreviated quantum “natural units” the predicted density is 2.9 × 10120 greater than the ~10-9 J/m3 estimated by current measurements. However a comparable order of magnitude discrepancy for energy, 6 × 10120, emerges when the total calculated force within the universe is distributed across its width. The energy density within the vacuum should be ~10111 J/m3. Because the emergence of the total force value required the square of the cut off frequency for Zero Point Fluctuations, the discrepancy could be considered as an artifact of temporal sampling, that is, the implicit temporal increments from which the estimates were derived. The identity of the predicted vacuum energy density from counting modes and energy density from quantum theory and that obtained from Newtonian Force applied across the universe could be a considered example of ∑n = n, which is one condition for a holographic state.
