[Dave Lev (OP)]

So you can not create the vacuum energy.

No one needs to create the vacuum energy.
We do not need the BBT or any imagination theory to confirm the existence of the VE.
It is there in the infinite open space as it represents a natural activity in the infinite empty space.
In order to get better understanding, please read the following article:
http://www.markmahin.com/vacuum.html
“Vacuum Catastrophe” Should Be Called the Vacuum Miracle

"We tend to think of science as something that gives us the right answers. Almost always science does give us the right answer. But there is at least one case when science gives us the wrong answer – a really, really wrong answer. In fact, there is one case in which science gives us an answer wronger than any answer that you ever gave in school, even on those tests when you wrote wild guesses on your exam sheet because you had daydreamed through every class session.

The wrong answer given by science is the answer that it gives to the question: how much energy is in a vacuum?

A person not familiar with quantum mechanics tends to think of a vacuum as being just empty space. But according to quantum mechanics, empty space is not really empty. It is instead a seething froth of very short-lived particles called virtual particles. A virtual particle with mass is a particle that pops into existence and then pops out of existence a tiny fraction of a second later. Scientist think that the vacuum is filled with virtual particles corresponding to every type of actual subatomic particle that has been discovered. For example, they think that the vacuum includes incredibly short-lived virtual electrons, and incredibly short-lived virtual quarks (because both electrons and quarks are known types of subatomic particles).
You can get an idea of the modern concept of the vacuum by looking at the animation below. Each of the fleeting little specks represents one of the virtual particles that pop into existence, disappearing a fraction of a second later."


Once you confirm that the VE was always there in the infinite universe without any help from any BBT imagination, we can start our discussion about your following question:

I keep asking how you make the first BH and you don't have a sensible answer.

That's what logic says; if you can use the vacuum energy to create a universe, then I can too.

Yes you can.
You can also use the VE as a starting source of energy for the BBT.
I'm ready to consider this possibility.

So, do we all agree that the VE was always there in the empty space without any need for external help from any imagination external energy source?

[Kryptid]

Please - it isn't my personal rules.

That's not what you said here:

You have confirmed that you are working according my rules.

I'm using logical rules.

Apparently, you consider the requirement of measurements and observations to be a logical rule, otherwise you wouldn't have made the following statements:

How can we distinguish between real theories to science fiction theory?
Don't you think that the only way to prove any theory is to set an expectation and validate those expectations by real measurements?

Prove it by real observation or don't raise the science flag any more.

Please remember - the OBSERVATION is above any law and any mathematics.
There is no way to for the observation to meet our wrong mathematics.
We must adjust our mathematics to meet the real observation!!!

Any law of science must be based on clear observation.

They have to prove  those ideas ONLY by real observations and verifications.

The first rule is that you can't create anything without real energy source.
I hope that you agree with this rule.

Sure.

If so, then based on your following reply we first must set the BBT deep in the garbage.

So before we start our deep discussion about the vacuum energy, do we all agree that the BBT should be set in the garbage as it has no real energy source to start with?

It's been in the garbage for pages now. At least, that's the stance I've been taking. Bored Chemist isn't me, though, so he's free to defend the Big Bang theory all he wants.

No one needs to create the vacuum energy.

That goes against this quote of yours:

Sorry - you can't just start a theory while all the Energy of the Universe is already there.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Quote from: Dave Lev on Today at 07:04:06
So before we start our deep discussion about the vacuum energy, do we all agree that the BBT should be set in the garbage as it has no real energy source to start with?

It's been in the garbage for pages now. At least, that's the stance I've been taking. Bored Chemist isn't me, though, so he's free to defend the Big Bang theory all he wants.

Thanks
Do appreciate.

Quote from: Dave Lev on Today at 10:24:18
No one needs to create the vacuum energy.

That goes against this quote of yours:

No it's not

Quote from: Dave Lev on 13/08/2021 20:54:26
Sorry - you can't just start a theory while all the Energy of the Universe is already there.

The Universe was always infinite.
The Vacuum energy was always there, with or without the observable matter.
So, theory D starts while there is only VE in the empty infinite Universe.
My job is to explain how that energy sets the first BH and how that first BH sets our wonderful infinite universe.
Therefore, I do not start the theory while all the energy is already in our infinite Universe.
So, can we start now the discussion while the VE is there in the infinite empty Universe and there is no BBT?

[Bored chemist]

The Vacuum energy was always there

Where did it come from?

[Bored chemist]

My job is to explain how that energy sets the first BH and how that first BH sets our wonderful infinite universe.

You have not done either of those things.
You have put forward a fairy tale.

No one needs to create the vacuum energy.

No one needs to create the big bang.
Like the VE, it is "just there".


Do you not understand that if you can start with the assumption that what you need is there, so can anyone else?

[Bored chemist]

Do appreciate.
Quote from: Kryptid on Today at 10:47:37
Quote
Quote from: Dave Lev on Today at 10:24:18
No one needs to create the vacuum energy.
That goes against this quote of yours:
No it's not
Quote from: Kryptid on Today at 10:47:37
Quote from: Dave Lev on 13/08/2021 20:54:26
Sorry - you can't just start a theory while all the Energy of the Universe is already there.
The Universe was always infinite.

Kryptid has pointed out the fact that you contradict yourself. You saying "No it's not" does not solve the contradiction.
It just makes you look foolish.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

The Vacuum energy was always there

Where did it come from?

Vacuum energy is the property of the space itself.
https://www.wtamu.edu/~cbaird/sq/2012/12/20/what-keeps-space-empty/
"Even a "perfect" vacuum would still hold vacuum energy, the Higgs field, and spacetime curvature."
Hence, Even if all the matter and energy could be removed and blocked out from a certain region of space, there would still be three things we could never remove according to Dr. Genz: (1) vacuum energy, (2) the Higgs field, and (3) spacetime curvature.
Hence, you can't just take the vacuum energy from the space as you take a star or a galaxy from the space as it is a property of the space itself.
Therefore, no one needs to deliver that energy to the space..
Wherever there is a space (even a totally empty space) - it still carry that vacuum energy with it.
Is it clear to you?

[Bored chemist]

Vacuum energy is the property of the space itself.

Where did the space come from?

[Bored chemist]

Is it clear to you?

I know what it is.
I asked where it came from.
You did not answer.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Vacuum energy is the property of the space itself.

Where did the space come from?

You have asked about the vacuum energy of the space.
Now you ask about the space itself.
So, the space was always there in our infinite 3D Universe.
You can't move it, you can't expand it.
The space is the property of the 3D infinite universe.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

No one needs to create the big bang.
Like the VE, it is "just there".

No
The BBT energy isn't a property of space.
Therefore, you can take all of the BBT energy/mass from the space without affecting the property of the space.
Hence, Even if all the BBT energy/matter is removed and blocked out from a certain region of space, there would still be three things we could never remove according to Dr. Genz: (1) vacuum energy, (2) the Higgs field, and (3) spacetime curvature.

[Bored chemist]

the space was always there in our infinite 3D Universe.

Please provide experimental evidence for this statement (in accordance with your own insistence that only experimental evidence should be used to support theories.)

[Bored chemist]

The BBT energy isn't a property of space.

Your statement, made without any evidence, can be dismissed without any evidence.

The BBT is a property of space; specifically, it is the CAUSE of space.

[Bored chemist]

I know what it is.
I asked where it came from.
You did not answer.

You still have not answered the question.
Where did the VE come from?

[Kryptid]

Therefore, I do not start the theory while all the energy is already in our infinite Universe.

Your model starts with an infinite amount of total vacuum energy. Then your model posits that the total amount of matter and energy in the Universe today is infinite as well. So the amount of energy at the start is the same as it is now. You can't have more than infinite energy. So you are indeed starting your model off with the maximum possible energy, and thus contradict this rule:

Sorry - you can't just start a theory while all the Energy of the Universe is already there.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

the space was always there in our infinite 3D Universe.

Please provide experimental evidence for this statement (in accordance with your own insistence that only experimental evidence should be used to support theories.)

The ONLY real meaning of red shift is velocity.
A redshift of 0.1 means 0.1c
A redshift of 1 means 1c
A redshift of 13 means 13c
A redshift of 1100 means 1100c
A far away galaxy with its redshift of 13 means that it is drifting away from us at 13 times the speed of light.
The CMBR with its redshift of about 1100 means that we get it from objects that are drifting away from us at 1100 times the speed of light.
Therefore, it proves that our universe is very very big.
Some scientists claim that it is infinite.
The meaning of infinite universe is infinite sizes of the observable universe.
Only our BBT scientists with their twisted mind don't wish to understand the real meaning of a redshift and the simple idea that you can't fit an infinite universe in only 13.8 BY.
I claim that as our current universe is infinite, then it was already infinite infinity time ago.
Therefore, our universe was always infinite in its size and in its age and it will stay infinite forever and ever.
Any real theory must fit to a universe with infinite size and infinite age.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Your model starts with an infinite amount of total vacuum energy. Then your model posits that the total amount of matter and energy in the Universe today is infinite as well. So the amount of energy at the start is the same as it is now. You can't have more than infinite energy. So you are indeed starting your model off with the maximum possible energy, and thus contradict this rule:

Well, the current VE is  6*10-30 gm/cc.
I fully agree with you that even if the VE was only 1*10^-100 gm/cc in infinite universe it would represent an infinite energy.
However, the VE is the property of the space.
You can take all the observable matter from the space but you can't take the VE from the space.
Therefore, it is our obligation to show how the observable matter had been evolved in that infinite Universe.

[Kryptid]

So does that mean you are getting rid of this rule?

Sorry - you can't just start a theory while all the Energy of the Universe is already there.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

So does that mean you are getting rid of this rule?

Sorry - you can't just start a theory while all the Energy of the Universe is already there.

No, there is no contradiction.
As we can take out the observable matter from the space, then it proves that it isn't part of the empty space energy.
Therefore, as the universe started without the observable matter, the VE of the empty space doesn't include the energy of the observable matter.
Somehow we must find a way how that observable matter/energy is added to the empty space.
Therefore, new energy must be added to the universe in order to explain the evolvement of the observable matter in the infinite universe.

[Bored chemist]

No, there is no contradiction.

Yes there is.