law of cosrvation of energy??? law of consevation of mass??? how are things created from nothing?
114503
Law of conservation of Mass is exactly what prevents something being permenantly destroyed or created from nothing. You can't destroy Matter and you can't create Energy from nothing, Everything that exists has existed since the begining of the universe. It is possible to turn matter into energy, as shown when burning fossil fuels or making an atomic bomb
515678
The conservation law states that energy is neither created nor destroyed but merely changes type. So, when an object slows down it has less kinetic energy and that energy is converted to heat by way of friction.
275638
- All of the above\n\nThe 1st Law of Thermodynamics tells us that energy is neither created nor destroyed, thus the energy of the universe is a constant. However, energy can certainly be transferred from one part of the universe to another. To work out thermodynamic problems we will need to isolate a certain portion of the universe (the system) from the remainder of the universe (the surroundings).
658476
Law of Conservation of Mass.  The process of melting does not add or remove mass, and you're not creating or destroying any, so it should weigh the same before and after.
1136179
An interesting question.  \n\n#1 would seem at first glance to be automatically false, as everyone will agree that there is evidence that there was a time when the things we see today in nature, did not exist.  But to get a little deeper, what if these things are the natural products of natural laws that have always existed?  E.g. what if our universe is just one of an endless series of universes that appear, unfold under natural laws that have been in existence for eternity, and then disappear, only to get reborn again as a new universe?\n\n#2 is the *goal* of a scientific explanation.  I.e. to see how much we can explain by the discovery of natural laws.  Science has no way of knowing if such an explanation will always be possible, but it has to try.  And so far we have done remarkably well ... almost everything we see in nature can be explained in terms of the operation of natural laws.  And natural laws can often be shown to derivable from simpler natural laws.  (E.g., that's why physicists are on a quest to unify the four forces of physics ... so that all laws of atomic physics can be derived from a single law.)  However, scientists will always be faced with the question of where these simplest of natural laws came from.  And they may have to settle for the answer "they seem to have always been there", which brings us back to #1.\n\n#3, and #4 need more definitions to distinguish them.  What do you mean by phrases like "beyond nature", and "intelligence."  \n\nHOWEVER, despite being a died-in-the-wool evolutionist, I lean towards #4, (an intelligent, supernatural origin for all things in nature) but not with in the same sense as Intelligent Design.  I *don't* believe some intelligence designed every cell membrane, every flagellum, every eyeball, every bird, bat, or insect wing, every endochrine cycle, etc.  Evolution provides a far more satisfactory explanation for all those things based on such simple natural laws as the law of natural selection.  \n\nBut I do wonder where that force of natural selection, as a natural law, came from.   I believe it will be shown to be derivable from simpler laws of chemistry and thermodynamics, which can be derived from even simpler laws of physics.  But ultimately, we will still be faced with wondering where those primary laws of physics came from.
947929
There was only pure energy of which some formed into tiny bundles that fly in waves. We named those bundles of energy "photons". We named the size of waves that they fly in the "electromagnetic spectrum".  Photons can come together and form tiny shimmerings that we call "particles".  We also call those particles, "matter". Those particles can come together and form families that we named "atoms".  Atoms can come together as elements. Elements can come together and form compounds.  Compounds can come together and form organic compounds. Organic compounds can come together into lifeforms capable of consciousness and possessing senses. All "matter", including you, is made of a symphony of tiny shimmerings of photons, or pure energy.  Here is a real picture that we have recently made of the beginning of the Universe when all that energy appeared:\nhttp://www.princeton.edu/pr/pwb/03/0217/
293941
In the begining...(sorry, couldn't help myself) God decided that he wanted to see if he could create a rock so big he couldn't lift it. Since God was self-eternal, he knew he that what was directly "created" could never be truly equal to a being that was self-eternal, so he thought to himself "how about a place where they might be more likely to arise"?\nHaving pondered the logistics he finally decided that the best approach was to compact everything into a "ball", and then detonate said ball with such force that matter would be seperated from energy. He knew that certain elements would naturally bond together in the aftermath, forming chunks here and pieces there. Eventually forming more and more complex entities. Even to the point of being able to temporarily trap some of the free flowing energy that tried to pass through the material. \nThis trapped energy would, in it's attempt to move out of said material, give the appearance of animation. Some of this "animating energy", depending in part on the length of time it was trapped and the complexity of the matter it was in, would come to realize it's situation of separation. Perhaps then, if the animating energy accepted it's separation as not necessarily a bad thing, it could organize itself in such a way as to keep itself intact once it left the host material.\nOn a large scale this can be seen when some stars evolve into a black hole, with a "singularity" inside. On a small scale it can be seen in Jesus or Buddha or a few others who have organized their animating energy into a permanent consciousness.\nThus fufilling God's original experiment as to whether he could make a rock so heavy he couldn't lift it. A universe where separated energy can indeed become self-eternal. \n"In the image of God", but on a smaller scale.
799167
Hmmm...very theoretical of an answer you pursue there, my friend.\n\nSince our limted senses are not able to confirm our speculations, I shall speak in a dialect to the speculations only.\n\nThe matter and energy hols themselves in individual co-relation, and would cease to exist in this paradox without each other.\n\nThe Big Bang itself holds itself as a theory due to the sole fact, that the Universe is observed to have expanded, and it supports Einstein's theories as well. \n\nIn such an accordance, energy is prone to have evolved into matter, from Einstein's equation, which seems to be pretty logical, due to the colossal amount of energy at that point in time, that may have resulted in the formation of Universe.\n\nAs the theory goes, the 'infinite' amount of energy was existant for only a millisecond or so. It blast was followed by the formation of waves, which collapsed into miniscule particles we call photon, electron, and neutron and perhaps some other form of matter. This matter furthermore bonded together to give birth to the present Universe.\n\nWhat is actually amazing is the very fact, that all this occured in a few seconds. The forces took over and resulted in various formations, that we bear to our knowledge. We ourselves bear credit to such particles. The concept of life is a debatable query, yet it may hold itself in a form of energy as well. A sort of self-functioning energy that holds this matter in a co-ordinated existence. What we call memory, emotions and other fragments of our brain, could be a manifestation of this energy as well. Perhaps energy bears itself true to the 'spirit' as we address it. \n\nWhatever the matter, yet one factuality is in the least doubt. Matter cannot produced, nor destroyed, for just a creation or devastation would bear no fundaments to it, for energy holds itself responsible for every action. Such a creation/devastation would be like killing death. Heh he...\n\nTill next time, my friend, adieu!
428921
This question has driven me buggy for years.  As you stated, energy is technically "the ability to do work", and the other two answers posted have given excellent examples.   Unfortunately,  all the examples in the world don't tell us what energy actually "is".   We can see the results, as in, "Ok,  so this atom trades that particle with that one and speeds up...lovely...",  but as to what actually happens noone knows.  Thanks to Einstein we know that matter is kind of a "frozen" form of energy, but that isn't much help either.  Perhaps the whole concept will end up being purely semantic,  rather as "time" is another way to say "motion".  Who knows?  Exciting, no???  But for now all we can do is observe what happens, calculate what ends up where - and continue to wonder  :)
509753
Mass is the measurement of matter, usually in grams,\nkilograms, etc.\n\nMatter is any material found in the universe that is in one of three states- those being gas, liquid, or solid.\n\nThe law of conservation of matter and energy includes the\nassertion that there is a finite (limited) amount of matter and energy in the universe.\n\nMatter can be converted into energy (example: the sun\nconverts its matter into energy continuously in the process\nwe call nuclear fusion).
297208
As my education impressed on my mind; there is no empty space.  What we think of as "space" is not empty but a constant dance of virtual particals (protons/antiprotons, etc) constantly appearing out of the vacuum travelling a short distance, then touching and annihilating into nothing once again.  \n\n"Empty" space is filled with these interactions which I believe are known as vacuum fluctuations.  The law of "convservation of energy" is really something that holds on average.  Another principle called the uncertainty principle states that we cannot measure simultaneously the energy and time of a (system of particles?) more accurate than a constantant called h or hbar (a very small but finite number). \n\nSo in theory the universe can "borrow" energy from nowhere as long as that energy is returned before the h bar uncertainty in time runs out.  And thus "empty" space is filled with these vacuum fluctuations and is not really empty after all.  Of course I don't think I explained that too well.  See "In Search of Schrodinger's Cat" by John Gribben for a more coherent description
307523
You have to think back and ask the correct questions to answer this one. The theory of the "Big Bang" is incorrect. First Question: "Where did the matter come from for the "Big Bang"? Answer: "From somewhere else". Keep asking the question of "Where did something come from"? and you have to arrive at the fact that at some point, there was absolutely nothing.\n\nThis is a very hard concept to understand and think about because you always want to think in terms of a "void" if you try to think of nothing, but you have to realize that "a void" is "something" so you have to think of "nothing", "nada", "zip".\n\nThen you can arrive to the conclusion that...\n\n"It is the propensity for NOTHING to create SOMETHING".\n\nThe very first thing nothing would create is energy, something that would keep manifesting itself and propegate. That is what you would call "Life". Some refer it to "God" but it still all the same thing and exists everywhere in the universe.\n\nThis "Energy" would eventually become so extreme that it would create the "void", then the energy would transform into matter and gravity and begin to fill the void.\n\nThese three forces are the basis for all the laws of our current "Universe" and have dictated it's behavior ever since.\n\nThe universe if far older then the 13 billion years old we now can detect, it is constantly changing, expanding, and filling the ever greater void it creates as the energy, matter and gravity continues to be created.\n\nTo answer your question, you are sitting on it, it does not sit on anything.\n\nWhen your coporal body can no longer contain the energy that created you, as in all "living" things, your energy will again become part of this universe, no matter how trivial that energy may be, it is still a part of the entire energy that was and is still being created at this time.
552079
-the total is constant. One common phrasing of this is that energy cannot be created or destroyed.
960926
Yep.  It's called metaphysics.\n\nWhy do you think Einstein introduced his 'fudge factor' in his first Theory of Relativity?  Because he didn't like the metaphysical implications of the truth.  Fortunately, his contemporaries called him on it and he 'fixed' it and won the Nobel prize.\n\nSaid differently, if E=MC (squared), then energy can be converted into matter and vice versa.  The necessary implication is that neither can come from nothing, which is scientific evidence of there being something supernatural that created the known universe.  \n\nI call it God.  What do you call it?
920391
In the words of Einstein, matter is simply a different manifestation of energy.\n\n\nAs for energy, from everything we know about thermodynamics, it cannot be created or destroyed. Energy didn't come from anywhere and can't go anywhere. It simply IS.\n\nWhy? Well, we're not sure yet.
273527
No one knows exactly.  It's interchangeable with matter, but no one knows exactly what matter is either.  We can describe properties of matter and energy with reference to each other, but we can't really objectively understand what they are.
381905
According to the Law of the Conservation of Energy, energy is neither created nor destroyed; it is transferred or transformed from one form to the other in an isolated system.