The amount of possible consciousness seems to be governed by no law analogous to that of the so - called
conservation of energy in the material world.
The suggestion of anthropogenic global warming exceeding a tipping point and leading to runaway or irreversible global warming is a violation of
conservation of energy principles.
All systems are constrained globally
by conservation of energy but the possibility of local fluctuations depends on the amount of energy available locally, e.g. the distribution of energy in the system.
It seemed that the theory did not adhere to a well - established physical principle known
as conservation of energy, which states that energy can change forms but can never be destroyed.
I base my current understanding on the law of
conservation of energy where energy is neither created nor destroyed, but changes form through phase transition.
The differential equations of heat flow and
conservation of energy simply do not do what is claimed by the climate science radiative greenhouse effect.
Not only would it violate the laws of gravity, it would provide a perpetual motion machine, thereby violating the principle
of conservation of energy.
James Singmaster (# 5): Due to the law of
conservation of energy applied to our basically closed biosphere, any new energy from trapped non-heat source getting released in the biosphere eventually becomes heat energy.
I have found some solace in another law... the law of
conservation of energy which states, «that the total amount of energy in an isolated system remains constant, although it may change forms...» And there it is again... although it may change forms...
It has almost nothing to do with any «direct» heating of the oceans by CO2 directly, but rather follows from
basic conservation of energy once the surface fluxes are modified by the higher CO2.
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act [of 1975], as amended, specifies that the Department [of Energy] must consider for amended standards those standard levels that «achieve the maximum improvement in energy efficiency which the Secretary determines is technologically feasible and economically justified» and which will «result in
significant conservation of energy.»
And if Jupiter and Saturn were locked in some resonance duet — for one to move out, the other must move in — they could not both move out or in without the law of
conservation of energy again being violated.
We have
strict conservation of energy, not a strict conservation of matter... as in «matter can neither be created nor destroyed (because it can in particle annihilation)».
The Laws of: Biogenesis, Heredity, Thermodynamics, Conservation of Energy!!!
Phrases with «conservation of energy»