Conservation of Energy

So I have a problem with the conservation of energy to astrophysics. While it is applicable to physics involving everything we do on Earth and in this solar system, is conservation of energy true for the universe. For example, the universe is always expanding that means energy is being dissipated outwards throughout space-time since energy cannot be created or destroyed. This got me thinking, in the beginning of the universe, was there just a glob of energy that was compressed and then over time got released throughout space-time and created the universe today when it collided with another glob of compressed energy. In other words, before the Big Bang, was there two energies that collided in space that created reactions that converted energy into other forms and is being dissipated throughout space-time?? If this is true, then there must have been a hell of a lot of compressed energy in some type of form at the beginning of time. I guess what I'm trying to ask is what type of energy do you think was existent at the beginning of time. And also, do you think it's true that energy cannot absolutely be created and that energy has been existent forever?? This is a paradox, there is no beginning of time then and there is no end, I guess this is the honest concept of infinity. Also what possibilities of the principles of conservation of energy can be manipulated to create a renewable source or renewable form of energy?? I would believe the first problem of renewable energy is how to convert energy to a usable form with technology readily available.

Does energy have a mind of its own is another question. Using the loosest terms as to minimize the constraints of language to the real answer, evolution of energy would be interesting to theorize.

I had always wondered why the planets keep spinning. Eventually I realized that there is no friction against the ground or an axis like there is for a wheel.

When I was eight, I wondered about frames of reference, like... why does this ball not move towards the back of the bus if I throw it upwards? Then I realized that it has the same velocity as me.

While the universe expands, useful energy decreases, but total energy is conserved. Energy stays the same, but entropy increases. An increase in entropy marks a decrease in the usefulness of the energy, and a progression towards one possible end state of the universe, a totally uniform cloud of particles at the same temperature.

Heavy elements are created by nuclear fusion. The death of a star (supernova!) seeds the local area with elements necessary for life. Scientists have found carbon based molecules in space.

I think it's at least 25% likely that the universe undergoes cycles of compression and expansion, and that stars, averaged in the long run, are born and die at the same rate. This last thing doesn't really mean anything cause it applies to any lifeforms, right?

Well, people have been making perpetual motion devices for like... centuries. But of course, they were all fake. Too bad.

Now about energy... What if we had ideally efficient fission and fusion processes? Would the reactions ever be able to just go back and forth? Nah. Like other processes, entropy increases. Well, the fusion process wouldn't produce nuclear fuel hardly ever. That stuff is really high proton.


Does energy have a mind of its own?

The way I (and most scientists) understand it, particles interact through the four forces, and energy is a measured quantity.

Idiots will tell you all day that quantum mechanics totally flips the world around into probabilistic nonsense, but I am telling you straight up that reality must be deterministic based only on the spatial arrangement and bodily kinetic (velocity and angular velocity) quantities of particles.

But um, light is pretty crazy, what is that shit?
First, God made light...

But along the same lines as your question, philosophers have often wondered....
Is there something it is like to be a rock?

Quantam mechanics tends to lean towards crack pot psuedo-science.

For me... balance is the key.

Necessity of force.

A simple question related to physics. Is the derivative of kinetic energy momentum with respect to velocity? I was just thinking about this in relation to the derivative of position vs time is velocity vs time and the derivative of velocity vs time is acceleration and since there are applications to these, what and would there be a real life application of the integral of kinetic energy??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_energy

Typically the concept of force is best understood in relation to momentum. Force controls momentum.

Kinetic energy is always relative to the movement of the object. So I guess you could easily correlate momentum with kinetic energy.

Summation of kinetic energy over time? Ummm...maybe summation of energy as a whole is conserved... and you can observe the trends... but i think state to state is easier. Summation neccessary?


---
Flux is a concept of energy?