Do You Think Law Of Conservation Has Limitations ?

[AmanShah]

I do not think,law of conservation has some limitations.

 

What mystery is how much big is space.Wheres the boundary of our expanding universe?

It's big mystery because everything in this world should be quantitative according to Quantum physics.

 

Such violation is impossible,that also means perpetual motion is aso impossible(except the fact that real Non-Perpetual gravity engines are possible).

Looks like you have to take your physics classes.

Edited April 7, 2012 by Aman Shah

[AmanShah]

Hello Mr.URAIN,

There is nothing like reincarnation.This is a science Forum,not a religious forum and please discuss only scientific things.

(Looks like you are from South India from your blog.I am also from India.)

I read your blogs and PDF document:It's funny and non sense,better is you become a sanyasi/saint.Ha Ha Ha.

Edited April 7, 2012 by Aman Shah

[URAIN]

Aman shah

 

I have already said, how conservation law has limitations on the 15th post.

 

I will not say again that thing (but any one can know this on 15th post).

 

Somebody don’t think living organisms as existences and some people don’t think science is the study of all existences, including living organism.

 

Leave, what I had said in previous post about the limitations of this law.

 

I ask one question that,

Does established science itself has full faith on conservation law?

 

The following science thinking is enforcing me to ask above question. i.e.

 

1) Some experts of established science says,

 

There is no conservation of photon number, for example. So photons can be created and destroyed, that is come in and out of existence in a finite time.

 

Particles can also be created in high energy collisions. These are subject to tight conservation laws, but still we can create particles and this happens all over the Universe. Also particles can decay into other particles. We have matter antimatter annihilation also.

 

The vacuum is also constantly "boiling" with particles coming in and out of existence.

 

Secondly,

2) Conservation law says anything will be not created and anything will be not destroyed.

 

Scientist’s thinks neutron has the mass and same scientists say that, this mass containing neutron will be decay after influencing a nuclear chain reaction.

 

What is the meaning of this “decay” word ?

 

As I know decay meaning is destroy then how any mass will be destroyed?

When conservation law itself says energy/mass neither be created nor be destroyed.

 

Third,

3) Number of origin of universe theories also bring us towards violation of this law.

 

These theories say, at beginning of universe ‘nothing’ was existed and universe was originated by fluctuation of particles at quantum level. (These type theories also will be published in a peer reviewed journals.)

 

It again says that energy will be created.

 

By these things science itself did not fully accepted the conservation law.

 

But I say, with perfection that “those which are existed now, that will be exist forever and these were existed at the origin of universe also.

 

But who accept conservation law, they don’t accept it.

 

Because conservation law has the limitations.

 

Main limitation is it does not says, why any thing will be not destroyed? Why anything will be not created?

 

But Prem Parvathi principle clearly answers to these questions.

 

This principle says that any “nothing” or any “not existence” has never existed in this universe. Only “existence” has existed in this universe and it will be exist for forever.

 

( ‘Nothing’ or Not existence = which was never existed at past, not existed in present and which will never exist in future also.)

 

If there is any chance of existing “not existence” then only creation and destroy takes place. While “nothing” or “not existence” has not existed then, there is no chance of existing, creation and destroy of existences.

 

We will not see this above thing in conservation law.

 

You have to read the discussion on this principle. http://scienceforums.com/topic/24079-natural-phenomena-for-conservation-and-invariance/

 

Before giving response to my post. Ask yourself that, does established science itself fully accepted conservation law as standard law.

 

If it accepted then,

 

1) Why established science/scientists say that there is no conservation of photon number?

(For example. So photons can be created and destroyed, that is come in and out of existence in a finite time.)

 

2) Why established science/scientists say mass will be destroyed (in case of neutron)?

 

While a law must and should be correct in all condition to every existence. But scientists are not applying this law to neutron which influence nuclear chain reaction.

 

3) Why most of accepted theories (by peer reviewed journal) indirectly says creation of things will be happen and destroy of existing universe will also happen?

 

Think a bit, with reasoning.

Edited April 10, 2012 by URAIN

[Pincho Paxton]

Conservation of energy is that we are particles the same as any other object in the universe. We survive as particles the same as any other object in the universe. When you turn to dust you are conserved.

[7DSUSYstrings]

Do you think law of conservation has limitations ?

 

Science knows that all living organism have the energy/matter but it does not says, living organism will be conserved.

 

 

I tend to see it as a mere quantitative redistribution. Compaction, as string theory suggests, does not exclude conservation. The comparison can be made between potential, kinetic and total energy. Even tachyons or tardyons would be subject to conservation.

[maddog]

Do you think law of conservation has limitations ?

I do not see it in these terms. I definitely see the Law of Conservation of Energy to be a fundamental on in what develops in physics.

 

However, this does not in an of itself require that we have that law understood as it is stated, that "all" of the Energy has currently been "accounted" for, that we are even the proper (mathematical) field (i.e. Reals) for the definition of our variables. Quantum Mechanics (QM) uses a Hermitian Operator which has embeded complex/imaginary constants. What if we treated the Langranian or Hamiltonian operators drawn from Classical Physics when discussing regulations of energy in the small, that they may behave also as Self-Adjoint operators or that the base algebra might be Quaternion in nature and not specifically "Real". One alternate speculation, I have been playing with is considering a Complex field for the Time parameter. The only stipulation is that Observables would need to cancel out and become Real valued functions to describe the world we actually see. Virtual particles would not necessarily require such and could do well beyond the requirements for causality. Excuse me if I am deviating from the theme of this thread. I just feel the question is pointing towards a direction without much yield. :rolleyes:

 

maddog

Edited April 13, 2012 by maddog

[suresh123]

Energy is neither created nor destroyed,it transfers from one form into another.

 

Like when we start fan electrical energy converts into kinetic energy of moving fan.

 

Energy and conservation always conserved in this universe.Nothing gets lost.

 

If you want more knowledge you can understand this topic from [sPAMLINK REMOVED]west bengal board of higher secondary education books[/url].This board has one of the best syllabus of science subject in comparison to other educational boards of India.

[HydrogenBond]

There is conservation of mass/energy. However, there is also a property called entropy. The entropy of the universe will increase over time according to the second law. Entropy needs energy to increase and often uses waste energy. Once energy goes into entropy, although energy is conserved, this energy is longer available as useable energy.

 

For example, say a cell divides into two. Going from one to two cells increases entropy. Even though we have the same number of atoms, mass, etc., some energy will go into this simple entropy increase and will no longer be available in a form that can be used. If entropy constantly increases in the universe, more and more mass/energy is no longer available. The energy is conserved in the form of entropy, but it is not available to do anything,unless we use a lot of energy to get it back.

 

Life increases entropy, for example during metabolism. This output diversity and randomness absorbs energy and makes the energy going into the entropy not available to the universe. It is conserved but not available. If entropy continues to increase in the universe, eventually all mass/energy will not be available.

 

Often people sense mass/energy appearing to disappear, because less is available. This is due to entropy having it.

 

Life generates a lot of entropy compared to no life. It is eating away at the available energy of the universe. Luckily there is plenty of energy coming from our sun so we won't miss the loss of available energy for a long time.