Conservation of Energy is total bullshit

[Anonymous No.10354490]

Nothing is more demonstrable then how wrong the conservation of energy is.
Energy is always destroyed and ceases to exist after its used.
Battery gets empty energy destroyed, used up.

Its so obvious only this theological dogma of some magical Energy substance that can not be destroyed is pulled out of some idiots ass.

I know science tries to somehow explain reality by using the concept of entropy, however this complicated shit is only there because the dogma of some magical indestructible energy must be defended.

Its far simpler to realize energy is destroyed after its used, simpler, better, more elegant.

The indestructibility of energy is right next to the indestructibility of the soul.

Change my mind!

[Anonymous No.10354496]

[Anonymous No.10354502]

>>10354496
t. ass blasted theology fanboy.

[Anonymous No.10354509]

>>10354496
Baited

[Anonymous No.10354555]

>>10354490
If energy can cease to exist, where did it come from in the first place?

[Anonymous No.10354558]

>>10354496
>>10354509
So is one of you jokers going to prove the dogmatic assertions of science about energy? Because its obviously wrong.

[Anonymous No.10354563]

>>10354555
Irrelevant derail the subjects are unrelated.
Use phone, battery energy decreases.
Energy tank is empty phone is not functioning.
So if the energy was not destroyed where did it go?
What happened here?

On a semi related note energy is always being destroyed always running out.
Dogmatic scientists name this event the heat death of the universe.
however its so simple to understand energy is always destroyed and its runing out and in the end there will be no energy and all processes will end.

Now prove to me my explanation is not simpler and more elegant then bringing up entropy and other mumbo jumbo to try to defend the dogma of some indestructible energy.

[Anonymous No.10354639]

>>10354490
>>10354502
[math]\color{#781b86}{\text{Wr}}\color{#74208b}{\text{on}}\color{#6f2591}{\text{g }}\color{#6b2a96}{\text{ag}}\color{#672f9c}{\text{ai}}\color{#6333a1}{\text{n,}}\color{#5e38a6}{\text{ A}}\color{#5a3dac}{\text{no}}\color{#5642b1}{\text{n.}}\color{#5147b7}{\text{ T}}\color{#4d4cbc}{\text{hr}}\color{#4951c1}{\text{ou}}\color{#4456c7}{\text{gh}}\color{#405bcc}{\text{ G}}\color{#4060cc}{\text{od}}\color{#4567c6}{\text{ a}}\color{#496ebf}{\text{ll}}\color{#4e74b9}{\text{ t}}\color{#527bb3}{\text{hi}}\color{#5682ac}{\text{ng}}\color{#5b88a6}{\text{s }}\color{#5f8fa0}{\text{ar}}\color{#649699}{\text{e }}\color{#689c93}{\text{po}}\color{#6da38d}{\text{ss}}\color{#71aa87}{\text{ib}}\color{#76b080}{\text{le}}\color{#7ab77a}{\text{. }}\color{#7eb777}{\text{Yo}}\color{#82b874}{\text{u }}\color{#86b870}{\text{ca}}\color{#8ab96d}{\text{n'}}\color{#8eb96a}{\text{t }}\color{#92ba67}{\text{us}}\color{#96ba63}{\text{e }}\color{#99ba60}{\text{yo}}\color{#9dbb5d}{\text{ur}}\color{#a1bb5a}{\text{ h}}\color{#a5bc57}{\text{um}}\color{#a9bc53}{\text{an}}\color{#adbd50}{\text{ u}}\color{#b1bd4d}{\text{nd}}\color{#b4bb4c}{\text{er}}\color{#b8ba4a}{\text{st}}\color{#bbb849}{\text{an}}\color{#beb648}{\text{di}}\color{#c2b446}{\text{ng}}\color{#c5b345}{\text{ o}}\color{#c8b144}{\text{f }}\color{#ccaf42}{\text{th}}\color{#cfae41}{\text{e }}\color{#d2ac40}{\text{un}}\color{#d6aa3e}{\text{iv}}\color{#d9a93d}{\text{er}}\color{#dca73c}{\text{se}}\color{#dea13a}{\text{ t}}\color{#de9738}{\text{o }}\color{#dd8d36}{\text{ma}}\color{#dd8434}{\text{ke}}\color{#dd7a32}{\text{ t}}\color{#dc7030}{\text{he}}\color{#dc662e}{\text{se}}\color{#dc5c2d}{\text{ b}}\color{#db522b}{\text{ol}}\color{#db4829}{\text{d }}\color{#db3f27}{\text{cl}}\color{#db3525}{\text{ai}}\color{#da2b23}{\text{ms}}\color{#da2121}{\text{.}}[/math]

[Anonymous No.10354777]

>>10354563
>Irrelevant derail the subjects are unrelated.
>Use phone, battery energy decreases.
>Energy tank is empty phone is not functioning.
>So if the energy was not destroyed where did it go?
>What happened here?
Energy changes. To say it is destroyed doesn't make any sense because that implies energy is this separate thing that can only be one thing until it self-annihilates into nothingness.

If energy is capable of turning into nothingness, then it must also be possible for nothingness to turn into energy, otherwise it's not logically valid. But this idea is clearly absurd.

>Dogmatic scientists name this event the heat death of the universe.
>however its so simple to understand energy is always destroyed and its runing out and in the end there will be no energy and all processes will end.

[Anonymous No.10354829]

>>10354490
if energy is destroyed OP then make a fridge that just kills the energy of everything inside it without using any energy. You could make assloads of money with this

[Anonymous No.10354837]

>>10354490
Bait

[Anonymous No.10354860]

>>10354490
the energy simply changes form
the only true creation of energy theoretically happens near black holes when virtual particles are disrupted from self annihilation

[Anonymous No.10355405]

>>10354777
>Energy changes
Where is it then show it to me.
>then it must also be possible for nothingness to turn into energy
No this makes no sense. There is no world where this statement makes sense. I mean seriously you are combining more bullshit together in some fever theology session here.

All I'm doing is describing reality everyone can see it and this is how reality works. You are the one who quite literally is proposing some afterlife where energy survives its destruction.

Prove this assertion.
>>10354829
> then make a fridge that just kills the energy of everything inside it
Literally every electrical device is doing this now.
A simple fan is a energy destruction device to run itself it will destroy energy, eat it up, use it. And no energy is left.
>just kills the energy of everything inside it without using any energy.
This statement makes no sense.
I'm describing reality that everyone can observe its a explanation of reality. What are you even on?

>>10354860
>the energy simply changes form
I know this line (of theology).
Changes into what? Show its existence post annihilation!
Run a phone and see how its energy is used up, where is this stuff going? Show where it is. it was used up, annihilated, exists no more.
>the only true creation of energy
Yep you have no grasp of any form of logic I was not talking about creation of energy.
The subject is destruction of energy try to have the mental capacity to stay on topic.
>>10354837
How about instead of spamming memes you can demonstrate this assertion.

[Anonymous No.10355435]

>>10354490
Hey OP pretty interesting theory. What evidence would convince you?

[Anonymous No.10355548]

>>10355435
Of what exactly?
Of the conservation of energy?

I'm only putting together the observations we have of the real world.
Battery's are used up.

I mean we have no examples of any other behavior.
And people love to throw out the
>Energy can not be destroyed or created
Did anyone think about how ridicules this line is?
Especially since we know and use batteries every day?

I mean at the very least its a far simpler model you throw out entropy and the indestructibility of energy and its fewer words to describe what we have.

So if you can show any observation that would contradict my model it would need to change.
All I see is this and some crazed obviously hyperactive and full with religious spirit scientists saying how "energy can not be created or destroyed" and visually getting excited over this statement.
And there are simple questions to this baseless statement like demonstrate this or show where it happens, where is this energy after its destroyed (they never say anything about it only that somewhere energy changes in some other magical form, this is never demonstrated).

[Anonymous No.10355623]

>>10354490
>>10355548
You used the example of battery so let's start with that. A battery is a device for converting one type of energy into another (chemical to electrical). Let's say you have a simple circuit with a battery and a resistor. As the battery discharges, the electrical energy it produces is converted again into heat energy that is dissipated through the resistor. While it can seem like the energy is "used up" it is simply being converted to another form of energy.
This is a general fact about natural processes: the conservation of energy. It has never been violated empirically, and also make sense theoretically. Of course, there are strange and counter-intuitive aspects (like mass-energy), but all the physics we know is still consistent with this law.

[Anonymous No.10355640]

>>10354490
>Nothing is more demonstrable then how wrong the conservation of energy is
Go ahead and demonstrate it

[Anonymous No.10355709]

>>10354490
By saying Conservation of Energy is bullshit, you also say Conservation of Mass is bullshit. Because Mass is energy, so all-knowing being. Explain yourself, because i dont think your correct.

Conservation of energy is still valid because your example is flawed. A battery simply converts chemical energy to electrical energy. Once those chemicals all get converted or the materials in the battery cant be used it cant output electrical energy.

Now, you may say "What happens to the electrical energy?" To which i would respond "Heat". Our electrical devices, while complex, are very inefficient and output heat. During that transfer, the electricity gets converted to heat, so no, there is no "magical energy substance", but it all balances out. We cannot create energy out of nowhere, which means that it cannot be destroyed. It just is. Your view and thinking is flawed.

[Anonymous No.10356124]

>>10355709
Literally on the same level like saying
"If god does not exist how can we exist? Checkmate atheist!"
You fail to grasp even the simplest of logical thoughts and inject presuppositions in a incoherent mess of a statement.
>Because Mass is energy,
The fuck are you naming everything energy? Because this makes the word meaningless!

>We cannot create energy out of nowhere, which means that it cannot be destroyed. It just is
Literally idiotic statement the concepts are unrelated and quoting some theologians who asserted it is null and void.

>A battery is a device for converting one type of energy into another (chemical to electrical)
Whatever lets go with electricity
>As the battery discharges, the electrical energy it produces is converted again into heat
And full stop trying to save your abortion of a statement the reality is like this you use electricity to for example create motion of a electric car (toy) you did buy the motion and work with energy and it was destroyed oh and there was some heat produced as waist from the process.
>another form of energy.
> is converted again into heat energy
Demonstratively wrong.
Is the word energy a meaningless word to you? Do you simply call everything energy?
Its not energy its used up if not why don't you simply take this magical heat energy and power the battery or circuit with it basically creating a perpetual motion machine?

Do it! If its all energy use it to create a perpetual motion machine. Why not use the output "heat energy" to create perpetual motion.
However you can not do it its impossible this heat is not energy and you used up the majority of the energy for the transportation of the car.

[Anonymous No.10356128]

>>10356124
Continued.


You must then use special bullshit to try to save this theological never observed concept of some energy being preserved and surviving its destruction. And when you start saying that this energy magically is transformed into "something something incoherent sentence injecting the concept of entropy" you realize you simply have created a afterlife for energy.

Not that surprising considering the idea of "energy can not be created or destroyed" has religious roots and masons and other idiots love to use it to argue for a afterlife for humans. Or they did in the past.

I know science textbooks fart this out and so do professors without thinking however here is the thing the whole process is nothing more then begging the question. Not only is this immortal energy never observed we demonstratively know its destroyed or create a perpetual motion machine simply reusing this immortal energy that is never destroyed to power itself forever.

[Anonymous No.10356210]

>>10355548

>if you throw out

You could throw out a whole bunch of core theories in order to have some dumbed-down worldview that makes easy sense for your brainlet ass, doesn't mean that worldview is correct.

Re-read >>10355623 , the energy that you think is just magically disappearing is in fact being dissipated - in the form of heat energy - through the vast heat sink that is this planet's atmosphere (hence you won't notice the heat of electronic devices like PCs unless you're in a cramped, 'stuffy' room).

[Anonymous No.10356259]

>>10354490
>Its so obvious only this theological dogma of some magical Energy substance that can not be destroyed is pulled out of some idiots ass.
Well argued sir! you've convinced me, fuck the libtards and religious sheep who trust mathematics, physics and scientific approach.

[Anonymous No.10356588]

>>10356124
What you are noticing here is that we are using the same word, energy, for something that is useful and something that is not. You do have a point that with this distinction in mind, it does seem strange that the units of heat are the Joule, the same as for (useful) energy.
In order to understand this, one has to think about what is going on microscopically.
The gist is that heat is really a transfer of kinetic energy of the constituent particles in the macroscopic system. When the particles in a system bang into outside particles, they impart some of their energy out of the system. As you point out, if we could somehow capture this energy and inject it back into the system, we would have what's called a Carnot cycle: a completely energy efficient system. In practice, it's very difficult to recapture heat energy. That is why people talk about the efficiency of things like engines.

[Anonymous No.10356634]

>>10354490
a battery converts chemical energy into electrical energy which becomes heat energy. Im sure you think this is just what (((they))) want you to think though.