Me wrote:I know wormhole travel is supposed to be theoretical and unproven, but what is the explanation by proponents of wormhole travel for the fact that the "instantaneous" movement from one space to another has frames in the past, therefore sending information not only back into the past but also making the universe at that moment of time have more energy than it did previously? Or did I misunderstand something?

Sorry about my English. It's not my first language.

Posted this on a sister site, but I like getting a lot of answers, so I have more to consider.

conservation of energy holds only for a closed system, we dont know whether the universe is closed.

In general relativity, energy conservation only occurs for static spacetimes -- those in which space does not change. [So energy is not conserved in our expanding universe. It seems to be conserved to us, because the effects of expansion are negligible locally over a human lifetime.]

A spacetime that has a wormhole time machine is not static. [The structure of space before the time machine was built, differs from that after.] So a violation of energy conservation is not surprising.

A book that I found useful in understanding the basics of general relativity and wormhole physics is The Physics of Stargates by Enrico Rodrigo.

cavarka9 wrote:conservation of energy holds only for a closed system, we dont know whether the universe is closed.

Care to explain the bolded part?

Also, what do wormhole proponents say about this issue? I'm not asking what happens, or whether or not wormholes exist, I'm specifically asking what wormhole proponents say on the issue.

containscotton wrote:

cavarka9 wrote:conservation of energy holds only for a closed system, we dont know whether the universe is closed.

Care to explain the bolded part?

Also, what do wormhole proponents say about this issue? I'm not asking what happens, or whether or not wormholes exist, I'm specifically asking what wormhole proponents say on the issue.

Wormhole proponents will probably say that a lot of energy is required to open such a portal, so you dont have to worry about that.
Basically saying that we dont know how far will the universe expand or is it endless expansion. Or how big our horizon is or what is beyond it,if anything is there or not beyond our horizon.Or how far we are going to expand. Also we dont know about the microscopic structure of space-time. In fact Heisenberg's uncertainty principle suggests that any amount of volume of space will have some amount of energy popping out of it if you observe for a certain time 't'.Or consider if our universe is sitting on a larger multidimensional structure.
Finally you can think in this way, consider a room with windows open on all sides all around it. Is energy of this room conserved?(with regard to a certain volume of space you have begun with).

Thank you all, especially for that last link.

Is the universe leaking energy
http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... ing-energy

another, Sean Carroll
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmi ... conserved/

Energy isn’t conserved; it changes because spacetime does. See, that wasn’t so hard, was it? -Sean Carroll

I thought that nothing is extremely unstable and is something. The total energy of the multiverse is zero and all that there is is a borrowing on nothing because of a quantum fluctuation going inflationary and evolving through various universes. Time and space are emergent from nothing, and interestingly time may be an illusion as we jump continually between universes.

Deutsch, Gribbin, Smolin,

Clive Durdle wrote:I thought that nothing is extremely unstable and is something. The total energy of the multiverse is zero and all that there is is a borrowing on nothing because of a quantum fluctuation going inflationary and evolving through various universes. Time and space are emergent from nothing, and interestingly time may be an illusion as we jump continually between universes.

Deutsch, Gribbin, Smolin,

I truly agree with this....There is much development going on and science will be there to answer....

Clive Durdle is correct. There are deficits and excesses in energy all the damn time. They're OK as long as everything works out in the end. A wormhole would just expand the time frame.

Note that Emmy Noether proved that conservation of energy was the same as time symmetry. Since a wormhole would break time symmetry (temporarily), it doesn't seem like much of a stretch that it would break conservation of energy (again, temporarily).

Hi,
I have been reading this forum since many days and liked it so much. Its really an awesome community.
Thanks.

sonia2010 wrote:Hi,
I have been reading this forum since many days and liked it so much. Its really an awesome community.
Thanks.

thanks, and welcome

Thanks Cavarka9,
Yeah, I agree with you in this regard. And wormhole does not violate anything because it doesn't "create" anything, it simply brings two points of 3 dimension or 4 dimension space (or both) together at another singular point, which is why diagrams often describe it as a bending of the fabric of space. All your doing is moving the position of space and time. Time in special relativity is its own dimension that occupies all of space, it doesn't get created or destroyed, it simply moves or flows in its own 4 dimensional manners.
Thanks.

cavarka9 wrote:Is the universe leaking energy
http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... ing-energy

Damn. God shouldn't have written it in Perl.