2. The Origin of the ZPE


2.1 The Two Usual Models
2.2 The Role of Planck Particle Pairs
2.3 ZPE Strength Should Increase With Time

2.1 The Two Usual Models

Using the ZPE, SED physics thus offers solutions to problems associated with QED and GR. More importantly, this approach first suggests an origin for the ZPE that is independent of Λ. Second, it allows us to mathematically determine the behavior of the ZPE with time. Third, the influence of the ZPE on other physical quantities can be predicted by this SED approach.

We note there are two current explanations for the origin of the ZPE using the SED approach [22]. They have been assessed as follows: “The first explanation … is that the zero-point energy was fixed arbitrarily at the birth of the Universe, as part of its so-called boundary conditions” [23]. A second school of thought proposes that “the sum of all particle motions throughout the Universe generates the zero-point fields” and that in turn “the zero-point fields drive the motion of all particles of matter in the Universe … as a self-regenerating cosmological feedback cycle” [23].

This second explanation requires the ZPE to be an artefact of atomic particle existence. This raises a problem since Puthoff has shown that the ZPE is required to maintain atomic particle motion and stability across the cosmos, as examined in detail later [24]. But if the ZPE is required to maintain atomic stability while the motion of these same atomic particles is required for the existence of the ZPE, it then becomes difficult to envisage how either the primordial ZPE or atomic particles originated by this feedback mechanism. It is true that several papers have demonstrated that this mechanism can maintain the presence of the ZPE once it had formed, as did Puthoff in reference [22]. But this avoids the question of its origin. By contrast, Planck’s second theory directly required the ZPE to be the cosmological source that influenced atomic particle behavior. Let us look more closely at the initial conditions in the cosmos and the origin of the ZPE in a manner similar to Setterfield & Dzimano [25].

2.2 The Role of Planck Particle Pairs

The model accepted here is that of an initial expansion of the universe out to a stable position about which it then oscillated. This initial expansion is attested to by the existence of the cosmic microwave background radiation which is usually considered to be an ‘echo’ of the original hot super-dense state. That widely accepted interpretation is also accepted here. It is true that there have been other explanations for the microwave background, but the additional data that it has provided, such as its polarization pattern, are difficult to reproduce in other models. The evidence for a currently static cosmos is discussed in detail below and includes the quantized redshift, which is difficult to explain if the universe is expanding now. It will be seen later that the brightness of distant Type Ia supernovae has a very natural explanation on the model presented here and obviates the need for dark energy and accelerating expansion. The initial expansion process fed energy into the vacuum, which Gibson has shown manifested as the smallest particles the cosmos is capable of producing, namely Planck particle pairs (PPP) [26]. PPP have a unique property; their diameters are equal to the Planck length as well as their own Compton wavelengths [27]. Each pair is positively and negatively charged so that the vacuum is electrically neutral. 

Now according to SED physics, quantum uncertainty only exists as a result of the ZPE. There was thus no initial quantum time limit for the PPP to remain in existence. Indeed, since the Planck length is the cutoff wavelength for the ZPE, these particles were thereby unaffected by the ZPE as it built up during the expansion process. As the cosmos continued to expand, PPP separation and spin increased. The separation between these charges gave rise to electric fields, while their spin created magnetic fields. Some of the initial expansion energy was thus converted into the primordial electromagnetic fields of the ZPE via the PPP.

2.3 ZPE Strength Should Increase With Time

We can go further. Gibson has pointed out that expanding the fabric of space will generate separation, spin and intense vorticity among the PPP [26]. He showed that this vorticity feeds energy into the system, which allows the production of more PPP. Therefore, while there is turbulence, PPP numbers will increase. The strength of the ZPE would then be expected to increase with time due to the initial expansion of space and the effect of this on PPP numbers.

However, the formation of vortices is only the first of three phases, the other two being persistence and decay. In these persistence and decay stages, the vorticity continued, so that more PPP would form via this ongoing process. Until all vorticity died away, PPP numbers increased, and so did the strength of the primordial ZPE. Gibson has pointed out that the PPP system is characteristically inelastic [26], while Bizon has established that such inelastic systems have stronger vortices and longer persistence times [28]. Since the cosmos is a very large system with immense energies, the persistence and decay stages for these vortices may be expected to be relatively long. As the strength of the ZPE built up by this process, it would be maintained by the feedback mechanism mentioned earlier [22, 23].

Under the conditions being considered here, it is important to realize that PPP will tend to re-combine due to electrostatic attraction. Once recombination occurs, a pulse of electro-magnetic radiation is emitted with the same energy that the Planck particle pair had originally [29]. This energy would further augment the primordial electromagnetic ZPE fields. This recombination process would eventually eliminate the majority of the PPP, although the initial production of PPP from turbulence would partly offset that. The ZPE strength would thus increase until all these processes ceased, and be maintained by the feedback mechanism.
Recent photographs from the Hubble space telescope indicate that the recombination of the PPP has occurred. Greene’s “fabric of space” is made up of Planck particle pairs [30], so as Pipkin and Ritter state “space assumes a granular structure[31]. This means that photographs of astronomical objects should be increasingly “fuzzy” with distance. Such “fuzziness” is not in evidence despite several searches [32 – 37]. These observations suggest that the PPP which had originally formed as a result of the rapid expansion process have now nearly all recombined, leaving the ZPE as the only evidence of their original existence.

Thus the potential energy from the initial expansion of the cosmos was manifested as PPP whose recombination emitted the electromagnetic radiation of the ZPE as the resultant kinetic energy of the expansion. This intrinsic feature of the vacuum, the ZPE, is now maintained by the feedback mechanism. With this origin for the ZPE, its existence apart from the cosmological constant, and free from gravitational effects, becomes a viable option. The modeling here also has the advantage that the precise form of the build-up in strength of the ZPE over time can be derived mathematically as in Appendix 1, or similarly in reference [25]. That mathematical treatment also explains the deviation from the expected brightness of distant Type Ia supernovae. Thus the cosmological behavior of the ZPE follows physical principles, which show that the ZPE built up rapidly to begin, but then slowed over time.


[22]  H. E. Puthoff, Phys. Rev. A 40:9 (1989), 4857.
[23]  Science Editor, New Scientist, (2 December 1989) 14.
[24]  H. E. Puthoff, Physical Review D, 35 (1987) 3266.
[25]  B. Setterfield, D. Dzimano, ‘The Redshift and the Zero Point Energy’ Journal of Theoretics, (Dec. 2003).  Available online at http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Links/Papers/Setter.pdf
[26]  C. H. Gibson, “Turbulence and mixing in the early universe,” Keynote Paper, International Conference Mechanical Engineering, Dhaka, Bangladesh, Dec. 26 to 28, 2001. Available online (March 7, 2006) at: http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0110012
[27]  M. Harwit, Astrophysical Concepts, 2nd ed., Springer-Verlag, New York, (1988)  513.
[28]  C. Bizon et al, in Dynamics: Models and Kinetic Methods for Nonequilibrium Many Body Systems, J. Karkheck, Ed. (Kluwer, Dordrecht, February 1999), available online at: arXiv:cond-at/9904135 v 1, 9 (April 1999).
[29]  B. Greene, op. cit., pp. 331-333. (see reference #9)
[30]  Ibid, p.156.
[31]  F. M. Pipkin and R. C. Ritter, Science 219 (1983) 4587.
[32]  A. Cho, Science, 301 (2003) 116-117; also F. W. Stecker, “Constraints on Lorentz Invariance Violating Quantum Gravity and Large Extra Dimensions Models using High Energy Gamma Ray Observations”, Astropart. Phys. 20 (2003) 85
[33]  R. Lieu and L. W. Hillman, “Stringent limits on the existence of Planck time from stellar interferometry” Astrophysical Journal 568 (2002) L67-L70.
[34]  R. Lieu & L. W. Hillman, “The phase coherence of light from extragalactic sources – direct evidence against first order Planck scale fluctuations in time and space”, Astrophysical Journal 585 (2003) L77-L80
[35]  R. Ragazzoni, M. Turatto & W. Gaessler, “Lack of observational evidence for quantum structure of space-time at Planck scales”, Astrophysical Journal 587:2 (2003) L1-L4
[36]  Y. J. Ng & H. van Dam, “On Wigner’s clock and the detectability of spacetime foam with gravitational-wave interferometers”, Physics Letters B 477 (2000) 429
[37]  J. C. Baez & S. J. Olson, “Uncertainty in Measurements of Distance”, Classical and Quantum Gravity 19:14 (21 July 2002) L121-L125

Go to: first page, section 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 or appendix 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, or tables, or figures 1-7, or figure 8 or reference page.