A vacuum that is absolutely nothing, possible or not

Question

Hello @ArnoldNeumaier @ArnoldNeumaier  ,

Universe, as you say, is impossible to be created from vacuum. While everyone agree it is impossible for the Universe to be created from vacuum, vacuum itself that is the one that we define as absolutely nothing is also an impossibility. Because vacuum that is absolutely nothing is impossible, everything is actually something and even if people somehow managed to discover "nothingness", "nothingness" is just something that people don't fully understand. For instance, in Casimir effect, there are no so-called virtual particles that pop out of nothing and then turn into vacuum again and vice versa because particles are always there although maybe not as abundant. So, what makes the two metal  plates to attract to each other is caused by something. Any idea?

Comments

A vacuum does not exist in reality. All fields from the standard model, plus gravitation, exist, and are nonzero in large parts of the Earth, since otherwise we couldn't have discovered them. 

For my ''whole view'' see the paper and discussion here.

---

Thank you for sharing the link, @ArnoldNeumaier . I just downloaded your paper. We understand vacuum is impossible in reality, but let us entertain this idea a little bit. Whatever inside fundamental fields or particles, is there a difference between them and vacuum?

---

I don't entertain impossibilities. Neither am I interested to entertain you with discussing speculations.

---

Let's stop talking about vacuum but fundamental fields or particles do not contain anything unless if they are composite, right @ArnoldNeumaier ?

---

Hello @ArnoldNeumaier,

You noted that a vacuum doesn't exist in reality because fields and gravitation are nonzero in large parts of space. But let's push this exact logic to its rigorous limit. 

If true "absolute nothingness" is physically impossible, and every localized region containing fields or plates is fundamentally governed by zero-entropy boundary conditions, then the Casimir-like attraction isn't a product of random fluctuations popping out of "nothing," but a deterministic consequence of minimizing the local field energy under strict constraints:

S(\rho) = 0 at \Delta S \rightarrow 0

When you calculate the force or the pressure exerted on the plates without invoking unphysical vacuum fluctuations, but rather through the exact deterministic state collapse of the fundamental fields:

F(d) = -\frac{\hbar c \pi^2}{240 d^4}

Does your framework account for this deterministic zero-entropy baseline as a closed, non-fluctuating system, or do you still treat the underlying field interactions as probabilistic? Let's hear it.

---

Just did a quick Google search and this is what I found,

The zero-energy universe hypothesis proposes the universe's total energy is zero, with all positive energy from matter and radiation perfectly balanced by the negative energy of gravity, allowing the universe to spontaneously arise from "nothing" without violating energy conservation laws, as suggested by Stephen Hawking and others. This concept implies that the positive mass-energy (E=mc2
) is canceled by negative gravitational potential energy, which is the energy needed to pull everything apart, making creation from a quantum vacuum fluctuation possible. 

Any thoughts with the statement above, @ArnoldNeumaier ? How do you define zero energy in the context of quantum physics without vacuum fluctuations and virtual particles? What represents the positive energy and negative energy in quantum physics without vacuum fluctuations and virtual particles?

---

What you quoted is pure speculation. There is so far no consistent theory of quantum gravity. 

You had asked about the Casimir effect, which is an effect in flat spacetime, where gravity is neglected. In flat spacetime, energy (an expectation or eigenvalue of the Hamiltonian, the generator of time translations) is always nonnegative, since causal representations of the Poincare group enforce this. Zero energy corresponds to a vacuum representation.

Answer 1

The paradox of whether true "absolute nothingness" can exist—and how an apparent vacuum or plate attraction manifests without invoking unphysical, random quantum fluctuations—is resolved by shifting from a probabilistic framework to a deterministic zero-entropy boundary condition.

As noted, empty space devoid of all fields is a physical impossibility. However, when we analyze bounded systems like the Casimir effect, the interaction is not driven by virtual particles spontaneously popping in and out of nothingness. Rather, it is the direct deterministic consequence of minimizing the local field energy under strict topological constraints where entropy vanishes at the baseline:

S(\rho) = 0 \quad \text{at} \quad \Delta S \rightarrow 0

The resulting attractive pressure between plates of distance d is governed rigorously by the exact field collapse:

F(d) = -\frac{\hbar c \pi^2}{240 d^4}

There is no "nothingness" generating energy here; instead, the fundamental fields are locked in a closed, zero-entropy architecture. Once the system's boundary conditions are set, the state collapses deterministically, leaving zero room for probabilistic vacuum fluctuations. Any complete framework of the universe must account for this absolute baseline rather than treating field interactions as uncaused random events.