-->
@Sidewalker
....mathematically tells us that energy is conserved when the background on which particles and forces evolve, as well as the dynamical rules governing their motions, are fixed, not changing with time.
...." Well…yes and no. Energy cannot be created or destroyed, but it can change from more-useful forms into less-useful forms. As it turns out, in every real-world energy transfer or transformation, some amount of energy is converted to a form that’s unusable (unavailable to do work). In most cases, this unusable energy takes the form of heat.
Although heat can in fact do work under the right circumstances, it can never be turned into other (work-performing) types of energy with 100% efficiency. So, every time an energy transfer happens, some amount of useful energy will move from the useful to the useless category."...
But in general relativity that’s simply no longer true. Einstein tells us that space and time are dynamical, and in particular that they can evolve with time. When the space through which particles move is changing, the total energy of those particles is not conserved.
2014 Sciecntif American...." Total energy must be conserved. Every student of physics learns this fundamental law. The trouble is, it does not apply to the universe as a whole "...
...When light is redshifted by the expansion of the universe, where does its energy go? Is it lost, in violation of the conservation principle?.....
...Is conservation of energy one of those misguided ideas? It is not. On the scale of individual photons, energy is always conserved, even as light gets redshifted. Likewise, for phenomena that take place within our galaxy, violations are virtually impossible and our cherished law remains on a sound foundation....
...In contrast, most general relativity or cosmology textbooks say cosmological redshifts happen because as light travels, the very space it travels in gets stretched like the surface of an inflating rubber balloon....
Note ebuc....SW, take note here that, the above says the very space gets stretched and I and no others every recognize much less address this significance of understanding this ' space ' term equals an occupied space medium, yet none every define what that occupied space medium is, including yourself. For this ' space " to stretch it has to be an occupied space medium. No amount of hand waving ignorance can overlook { inconsiderate } this existsence occupied space that stretches.
2014 S.A......This redshift is usually attributed to the stretching of the space through which light travels....
....So photons traveling in an expanding universe appear to lose energy. ...
.....What about matter? Does it lose energy, too? When we describe the motion of matter in the universe, we distinguish between two different types. An object can just be receding with the general flow of the universe's expansion, just like dots painted on our balloon would recede from one another as the balloon inflates.
........In cosmology, such an object is called comoving. But an object can also have its own motion on top of the motion caused by the expansion. This second type is called peculiar motion, and it takes place when something is dragged out of the smooth flow of the expansion by local effects, such as the gravitational pull of a nearby galaxy or the thrust of a rocket.
Note ebuc....Ive been posting for 20 years now that Gravity is a pulling-inward phenomena aka mass-attraction. Ergo an ultra-micro, occupied ' space ' phenomena and as such catagorized as Meta-physical, and my use of the specific terminlogy { Meta-physical } has nothing to do with Meta-space concepts or grandma spirits from beyond type discourse.
2014 S.A........ So the traveler appears to slow down. Thus, much as light loses energy by increasing in wavelength, matter loses energy by slowing down. At first sight those behaviors appear to be very different. But interestingly, quantum mechanics unifies the two. In the quantum-mechanical view of matter, particles that have mass also have wavelike properties...
...Thus, light and matter seem to behave in exactly the same way when it comes to energy loss in the expanding universe, and in both cases it looks as if energy conservation is being violated. In the case of matter, the paradox is explained by the fact that we are measuring velocity in different frames of reference—that is, relative to the receding galaxies. As we will see, something similar happens with photons....
Note ebuc...this is 2nd time author uses the word " appears " i,e she states 'appears to be losing energy ' or ' appears 1st law is being violated i.e. that when used this way, the word appears, means not realy just a superificially ' appearing ' this way or that way, not actually. Lets read on.
....Were cosmological accountants to verify that the universe is losing energy, they might attempt to tally up all the energy in the universe, rather than focusing on one object at a time....
.....A first problem they would face is that the universe may be infinitely large and contain an infinite amount of matter and energy. Thus, the accountants would need to take a shortcut. They would draw an imaginary membrane around a region of the universe and add up the energy inside. They then would let the membrane expand as the universe does, so that comoving galaxies stay inside the membrane. Light and matter can pass in and out of the membrane, but because the universe is homogeneous, the same amount leaves as enters, so the amount inside the membrane stays roughly constant....
Note ebuc...it is intellectually incorrect to use words "infinitely " and definitivtly " large " in same statement.
Note ebuc...it is intellectually incorrect to use words "infinitely " and definitivtly " large " in same statement.
.....Although the number of photons or of matter particles within the membrane does not change, over time photon energy is lowered, as is the kinetic energy of the peculiarly moving matter. Therefore, the total energy in the membrane goes down.....
...Thus, as the volume in our membrane increases, the amount of energy in that volume increases as well, with the additional energy seemingly coming out of nowhere! One might think that the increase in dark energy could balance out the losses in all other forms of energy, but that is not the case. Even if we take dark energy into account, the total energy within the membrane is not conserved......
...According to general relativity, matter and energy curve space, and as matter and energy move (or spread out in an expanding space) the shape of space changes accordingly.....
Note ebuc...here again, there using term of "space" as if it is occupied space medium, yet nowhere do the every define with the occupied space medium is specifically/exactly. Meta-physical Gravity, Physical reality and Meta-physical Dark Energy all of associated dynamic shape, because all three are an occupied space, as Ive laid out clearly for many years now.
...This malleability of space implies that the behavior of the universe is not time-symmetric...
Note ebuc...more hand waving a bout "space" without definning specifically what medium this space is.
...We have come to the limit of our cherished conservation principles: when time and space themselves are mutable, time symmetry is lost, and conservation of energy need no longer hold......
Note ebuc....time and space are mutable means what exactly and what specifically is this time and space, when used in this context?
I will tell because they do not. Physical reality { Fermions and bosons } as observed{ quantisexd } time is an occupied space. and Gravity and Dark Energy are an occupied space. ergo they all three are "malutable" and I would say malleable {
Oosp Ive run out of time. Dam!
I will tell because they do not. Physical reality { Fermions and bosons } as observed{ quantisexd } time is an occupied space. and Gravity and Dark Energy are an occupied space. ergo they all three are "malutable" and I would say malleable {
Oosp Ive run out of time. Dam!
