 |
Proof the Law of Conservation of Energy is Wrong
Date: 12th August 2004
Author: Greg Alexander
EXAMPLE ONE
Consider two identical space rockets in the vacuum of space well away from the effects of any gravitational field. Both, in parallel, burn their engines at full power on two separate occasions of exactly equal duration. However the second rocket, immediately after its first burn does an about turn such that its engine is pointing in exactly the opposite direction just in time for the second burn.
In such a situation it is obvious that the first rocket will continue accelerating with the second burn while the first will start to decelerate, losing the velocity it had gained from the first burn. It is also apparent that by the end of the second burn the second rocket will have lost all the velocity it had gained from the first burn while the first rocket will have exactly doubled the velocity it had gained after the first burn.
Now consider that the law of the conservation of energy informs us that ‘energy can neither be created or destroyed, only transformed’. Each rocket can be considered as a closed system and both have had the same amount of energy supplied to it by its engine. However there is one striking difference. Even though the first had all its power from its engine transformed directly into kinetic energy, the second rocket is now stationary compared with the first, relatively speaking, and has zero kinetic energy. Now considering that the law of conservation tells us that energy can ‘neither be created or destroyed, only transformed’, what exactly has the kinetic energy of the second rocket’s two burns been transformed into? It would appear that as the two burns were directed precisely counter to one another, the kinetic energy from both has exactly cancelled out. Such a destruction of energy is completely counter to the laws of conservation.
Since there is no known process in the frictionless environment of space by which kinetic energy can be transformed into heat or any other form of energy, we can only assume that the kinetic energy in question has been destroyed as the result of a vector consideration such that the law of the conservation of energy as currently stated that ‘energy can neither be created or destroyed, only transformed’ has not been fulfilled.
Q.E.D.
EXAMPLE TWO
When a body such as the Moon orbits the Earth it takes a curved path which approximates to a circle. According to Newton’s First Law all bodies continue in a straight line unless acted upon by an external force. This external force is supplied by the Earth’s gravity which causes it to accelerate. Since this force has clearly deviated the Moon from its original straight line course, surely work has been done upon it as a result of the equation Work Done = Force x Distance. Indeed on opposite sides of the Earth the Moon’s velocity vector is the complete reverse resulting in the fact that every orbit its overall directional polarity reverses twice. Considering the size and mass of the Moon surely it would take mega, mega joules to achieve this and yet this process has been accomplished time and time again for literally aeons? What is the source of all this energy and why does it never dwindle? Of course the source of all this energy is the Earth’s gravitational field which most certainly will never dwindle despite the sheer number and mass of objects it may happen to attract towards itself. But does such a scenario not contradict the very law of the conservation of energy?
To put the above observation in an entirely different perspective consider a space rocket which seeks to perform the exact same movements as the Moon about the Earth but in a gravity free environment within the depths of space. Of course in such an environment there is no air resistance and hence no aerodynamics so to perform this motion the rocket would have to do the following : with a forward velocity identical to that of the Moon, thrust would need to be applied from its rockets at an exact right-angle to its direction of motion. The craft would also need to rotate exactly once every ‘orbit’ (in the exact same plane as that of its pseudo-orbit) so as to keep it accelerating at a right-angle to its direction of motion. Of course such a feat would require an enormous amount of fuel and hence an equally enormous amount of energy. However the Moon gets all this energy for ‘free’ from the Earth’s gravity so can we not assume that the Earth’s gravitational field is an unending, ever bountiful source of energy in this respect and that this observation contradicts the most basic tenet of classical physics concerning the conservation of energy?
EXAMPLE THREE
In the case of the classical equation for kinetic energy, K.E. = ½mv², it would appear that the law of conservation of energy is contravened every single time it is applied. This results from the fact that the kinetic energy is proportional to the velocity squared such that, for example, when the velocity is increased from v to 2v, four times as much kinetic energy is obtained than was previously the case when the velocity was just v. However with any powered vehicle, surely the same amount of fuel would have been used to increase the velocity from 0 to v as was used to increase the velocity from v to 2v? So where has the extra energy exactly come from? This must surely contravene the law of conservation of energy?
For more information on the last example see "Are the 'Laws of Physics' Wrong?" in the list of links below.
free hit counter
Are the 'Laws of Physics' Wrong?
Is the Special Theory of Relativity Wrong?
Problems Explaining the Sky's Blue Colour
Gravitational Bias and Escape Velocity
Is the Solar System's Cratering Really Meteoritic?
Send E-Mail to:
Copyright © 2005 Greg Alexander. All Rights Reserved