Can the vacuum space in a light bulb can annihilate earth leaving a cloud of particles?

- Advertisement -

Contemporary scientific theories tell us that what we may see as vacuum is only vacuum on average, and actually thriving with vast amounts of particles and antiparticles constantly appearing and then annihilating each other. It also suggests that the volume of space enclosed by a light bulb contains enough vacuum energy to boil every ocean in the world. Therefore, vacuum energy could prove to be the most abundant energy source of any kind. Which is where you come in. All you need to do is figure out how to extract this energy and harness it in some kind of power plant – this can easily be done without arousing too much suspicion – then surreptitiously allow the reaction to run out of control. The resulting release of energy would easily be enough to annihilate all of planet Earth and probably the Sun too.
Just a small note to mention, the earth 5,973,600,000,000,000,000,000-tonne ball of iron over 4.5 billion years old.
So does this sound impossible or highly unlikely. Explain.

- Advertisement -
Notify of
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

if it is so easy, how come nobody did it yet?
sry, but vacuum is indeed empty or near empty … matter can not just appear out of nowhere.
and light bulbs do not have vacuum inside, they’re filled with an inert gas (nitrogen, argon, or krypton).
On the other side, the mass of the earth is more than enought to destroy the light bulb.


it’s impossible. impossible. don’t waste your time sir.


Gimme a sec, lemme just sum up my calculations.

Inquisitive guy

stop reading sci-fi novels and come down to earth, channel your energies into main stream science. once you have mastered those, we’ll talk.


How many lawyers does it take to pull 1.27 gigajoules of energy out of a lightbulb?

ignoring vacuum, we KNOW how to pull huge amounts of energy out of a small amount of mass (boom!). Is it absolutely incredible to pull ‘reasonable’ amounts of energy out of microscopic amounts of mass?
That doesn’t sound like it has to violate any basic principles.
Unfortunately, this magic 9 volt battery than runs forever on one fingernail clipping will probably require a basic principle of science which will turn out to ALSO allow any disaffected teen to destroy the universe by smacking two bowling balls together ‘just right’ and has been discovered repeatedly though the ages (Tunguska?) and suppressed for our own good.
So you can’t get rich off of the idea without immediately having to look for a new universe to pollute.


Um, qua?
Ok, seriously…first, take some math.
Then take some more math.
Then some physics & a little chemistry for fun.
Then more math & a good year of physics…and really enjoy them.
Then, and here’s the tricky part…
…get into college and repeat the above.
Ok, now…what?
Dude, seriously. A perfect vacuum has the potential for massive distruction, of course…but what’s going to hold it together until it can interact with the earth? How would you create such an object? With what would you hold it?
So, avoiding those questions and focusing on your point about the potential for antimatter collisions…wouldn’t we see remnants of the energy released from this activity? Antimatter and matter interactions are (theoretically) not a zero sum game.
But lets say it could happen that we find out that antimatter actually can eliminate matter without any sort of energy release due to some kind of energy sublimation through an Einstein-Rosen bridge or something where it just goes somewhere else. Why would it be hard to understand that it would consume the mass of the earth? Antimatter particles are tiny. Not tiny like atoms, tiny like quarks. I mean TINY. So why wouldn’t an entire lightbulb of them (doesn’t seem like much, but then think of the scale of particles we’re talking about here…) eliminate a few trillion trillion tons?
It’s only confusing if you understand a little bit.
Sorry for busting on you, but seriously, why ask a question on a forum like this about theoretical physics?

I don't know

Yea, light bulbs only have a slight negative pressure not even enough to call a vacuum.


I guess a great deal depends on your definition of contemporary, but by the equations put forward by James Clerk Maxwell in 1865 (not just the four commonly published “acceptable” ones, but the other sixteen that other scientists of the time found unacceptable) the background energy (or “zero point” energy) inherent in the “vacuum” of the universe available for work in scalar potentials, rather than vector potentials (“classical” electrodynamics) can in fact be tapped (the patents are on file with the U.S. Patent office), and theoretically could be used to create a “doomsday” weapon as you have postulated- however, such a device would be essentially pointless as it would involve the destruction of the entire biosphere- unless someone were a psychotic maniac the likes of which has never been seen it would be couterproductive in the extreme. The ones that would worry me are the types that would use such physics to create more “bounded” technologies which would have incredible potential for warfare in pursuit of domination and selective destruction for nefarious purposes- for example the enslavement of humankind.
As with any technology or tool however it is not the tool that is inherently evil rather it is the uses to which such things are put which are evil or good- such an energy source would be exceptionally beneficial to mankind if it were developed for peaceful uses- but wholly unlikely given the stranglehold that corporate/government interests have a vested interest in maintaining over the populace at large.

jacob k

have you ever heard of the quantum vacuum? Matter can indeed foam into existence out of nothing. Its known as the “implicate order” and it is a concept of quantum physics that is slowly becoming more understandable. The universe is an amazing place.


Hello there! Τhiѕ post couldn’t be written any better! Reading through this post reminds me of my old room mate! He always kept talking about this. I will forward this page to him. Pretty sure he will have a good read. Many thanks for sharing!


Was Socrates sacrificing himself to save others or to create a legacy?

And why did he say the opinion of the unjust doesn't matter to Plato yet he yields his opportunity to escape because of what...

How would i tell some1 important an idea for Negative Energy?

I have a very probable idea but i dont wanna tell ne1 in case the idea might get stolen.

How does ones energy towards others cause an imbalance in ones own energy?

Like if you really hate someone and wish them to suffer why does it affect the other person and on what levels? Like you...

What does this Philosophical story mean?

I need to know what this Philosophy story means. 10 points to whoever tells me what this means. Here is the story: A university professor with...

what position should i meditate in?

I have been doing some chakra meditation and i cannot get into the lotus position. will that affect the way my energy is channeled?

What type of book would an open minded catholic read to except a Wicca practitoner into their family any ideas?

I am trying to persuade my aunt valerie that me being a Wicca practitioner is perfectly fine & I think getting her book with...
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x