Is posible to calculate how much energy is in Universe?

Question

If energy is conserved and only degradated (entropy always grow)
I think the amount of energy in Big-Bang is the same that today perhaps there are a physics model that calculate it and how it degrades, isnt it?

Answer 1

Technically, yes. practically, no. You are thinking not of entropy but of conservation of mass.

The reason it is not practical is because we still have no idea how many galaxies are in the univrerse, nor do we know how much dark matter there is. black holes(which are white, funnily enough) "dissappear" energy, so we have no idea how much would be in there. So, If we could figure out, how much energy is caught in black holes, how much dark matter there is, and in turn how much energy there is, calculate all of the energy left from the background radiation of the big bang, and take an inventory of all of the stars and how much energy there is(this would be the simplest thing, if there weren't so many of them), then yes, we could calculate how much energy is in the universe.

One of the problems is that we would have to include ourselves and every living being on the planet in this calculation.
You can see why this wouldn't exactly be practical.

Technically, energy should never dissappear, but is converted into another form of energy. black holes seem to be the exception, because we're still not sure what happens to the energy that goes in there. lots-o-theories abound. Even if we found a WAY to calcuate all of these things, it would take several lifetimes to do.

Answer 2

Actually, there is no good way to describe the energy content of the universe in general relativity (the applicable theory here). The problem is that, because of the curvature of space-time, it is impossible to state exactly what the energy of a far-away event is. Like in special relativity, two different observers will say it has two different energies. So there is simply no way to consistently add up all the eneries into one number. In fact, due to gravitational lensing, the same observer can see the same event from tw different directions and potentially see it as having two different energies.

One of the difficulties is that there is no good way to describe the energy in a gravitational field. Remember that gravity is a curvature of space-time and so doesn't have an energy directly associated with it. This has been worked on for a few decades with no good resolution.

This problem can be solved to some extent if space-time is 'asymptotically flat', but this is a rather technical condition and is probably not the case in the real universe (it would have to be flat both in space and in time).

Even more specifically, it is known that photons from early in the universe have red-shifted to lower energies due to the universal expansion. This describes a definite violation of global conservation of energy. However, local conseration still holds.

Answer 3

Yes, it is possible to calculate that. If we take the big bang model as a given, then the size and mass of the universe can be estimated. From that, we can derive the energy it contains both as a speed of the expanding parts, an as latent energy stored in the mass, thanks to the E=mc^2 equation.

However, the estimate must now take into account the dark matter and the dark energy that is requried to explain the current speed distribution of the universe, and those values are only unproven crude estimates.

Let's just say it can be done, and our best brains are working on it, but we haven't got the definitive answer yet.

But you are right about the energy being constant. The heat of entropy has to remain in the universe for it is, by definition, including all that there is (and all that there was) that has an influence on itself.

Answer 4

Since most of the mass/energy in the universe appears to be dark energy and we don't even know what dark energy is, plus we currently have no idea if the universe is finite or infinite, the odds we will someday know the sum total of the entire universe would seem to be pretty long. We may get a good handle on the quantity in the visible universe.

Answer 5

The thing is no one was there when the universe was created. Science only VERY recently ( as in in the last 5 years) came up with a WORKING theory. While the big bang theory has been around in some form or other. It is only within the past couple years that scientists came up with a theory to explain the discrepancy between the redshift data, and the estimated length of time it would take the universe to evolve to its present state. ( They say that cosmic microwave background temp was higher in the past and that explains the discrepancy) There still are ys with the theory, but none are completely fatal to the story. That being said. The object of science is not to PROVE any theory. It is to observe, and draw conclusions. Not that it hurts to come up with theories before we have all the data, but if we are doing all this research just to prove that it is possible that there is no "higher being" then, well, that's not REAL SCIENCE. Not to mention that there are no holes in creation theory. (Yeah that's right I said it.) Now having said all that before everyone decides to give me a thumbs down because I believe in and eternal conscious being rather than eternal unconscious particles, I just want to say, I do what I feel is right and I only answer to myself. Whatever said "conscious being" never said anything to me, so why should I worry about what said being thinks, when he isn't concerned with telling me. Also, by the way, geniuses, most of the scientists that came us with the major scientific discoveries were creationist.

Answer 6

no I think not.
Because we are energies contained within a universe of pure energy, everything will seem proportional. You can measure conversion rates, reduction rates, force, and lots of other incremental statistics, but i think that only the proportions will ever be none. This would speculate that the universe is an endless supply of energy traveling in an infinite loop.

Answer 7

Yes, but you would need to know the volume of the Universe first. Even if you figured out the amount of energy just in one galaxy, you would need to know how many other galaxies there were to multiply that factor by.

And I could be completely wrong. But that is a cool question.

Answer 8

It pretty easy to calculate that actually. If the universe is infinite, it would contain an infinite number of matter and energy. Thus, there would be an infinite amount of energy in the universe.

Answer 9

There is absolutely no way to calculate the Universe's energy content. One can only estimate that is beyond the meager scope of human comprehension.

Answer 10

if you do calculate it,aint energy never destroyed but merely converted into another type.meaning its the same amount and will always be,just in a different state.