Physics Buffs, Please Critique This

So guys I am once again trying to write a piece on the correct use of the word energy. The goal is to highlight why it is wrong for new-agers to hijack this word to gain a sense of legitimacy. As I only have a layperson's understanding of physics, I have one paragraph I am unsure about.

Please criticize this post and help to enlighten me, it feels as if I am missing something, particularly in the last line 'nothing is made of energy'.

"Another claim we often hear to justify nonsense is that everything is energy. Most people believe this is a widely accepted fact. E=mc2 shows mass is equivalent to energy. It is not widely accepted from this that everything is energy. Is everything mass? Is everything volume? See how these questions do not ask anything meaningful? Saying everything is energy does not make enough sense to even be judged on correctness, which is why it is impossible to be a widely accepted fact. All systems involve computable quantities of energy, but nothing is made of energy. "

Well, I afraid I can't agree on the surface, but I may be able to help with the concept, which may be correct, I need to know more.

All matter is built up by consuming enormous energy over generations of Stars to get up to elemental Carbon, to have hydro-carbons, for example.

So, if matter is not created by Energy, then how? If it's not created from Energy, then what?

I happen to favor space-resonance and scalar waveforms to define matter, but it still need capture processes and it is made out of Space itself, crushed severely from energy.

But, that is not yet a working hypothesis, just math.

I'm thinking you are referring to the woo-woo aspects, (she has good energy, man)
so thats why the concept is correct.

Thanks for the input.

I think I can do a good job of explaining the equivocation of terms. What I am trying to counter is when the idea that everything is energy is used to justify beliefs like the law of attraction and karma. I want to be sure I don't make misstatements about energy in the process.

To me, simply put, the question comes down to this.

Is all this energy Intelligent, in some way we can't understand? That's the basis of Taoist beliefs, if I have that correctly. So, I can really extend that westward into most Beliefs (as a basis)

And that leads always, no matter what we call it, Energy, or God or aewpmq to wonder how we fit in. Ah, the aura, karma, the sun, the Stars. We are one with Energy! OK, but is it intelligent? (never mind the other Attributes.)

By the time we begin to wonder, we have already forgotten the hypothesis we must disprove scientifically, in order to move forward.

Postulate: Energy is Intelligent.

YES - NO (design experiments) but no, we skipped all that.

Pretty much everything is energy in one form or another. It would be helpful to define 'everything.' I would expect that 'everything' refers to the physical world. What becomes problematic IMO, is when people extrapolate into esoteric areas. Thoughts are energy in that they are created by neurons and electrical-chemical reactions but do thoughts exist outside our body? I think not. Misusing the term energy is only part of the linguistic deception that we get from the dualists.

Thanks guys. I am going to abandon that paragraph until I get a better grasp on that particular aspect.

Heisenberg said:

So guys I am once again trying to write a piece on the correct use of the word energy. The goal is to highlight why it is wrong for new-agers to hijack this word to gain a sense of legitimacy. As I only have a layperson's understanding of physics, I have one paragraph I am unsure about.

Please criticize this post and help to enlighten me, it feels as if I am missing something, particularly in the last line 'nothing is made of energy'.

"Another claim we often hear to justify nonsense is that everything is energy. Most people believe this is a widely accepted fact. E=mc2 shows mass is equivalent to energy. It is not widely accepted from this that everything is energy. Is everything mass? Is everything volume? See how these questions do not ask anything meaningful? Saying everything is energy does not make enough sense to even be judged on correctness, which is why it is impossible to be a widely accepted fact. All systems involve computable quantities of energy, but nothing is made of energy. "

Click to expand...

you are thinking of it in the wrong way.

If I said that a drink is entirely made up of water, but its has these solid chunks of ice floating around, is it not still just composed of water.

That's what Eisenstein did with mass he found out how it was related to energy.

where ice is just frozen

mass is just Energy/ Speed of light^2

How does this sound?

"Another claim we often hear to justify nonsense is that everything is energy. While there is scientific truth to this on some levels, it becomes a meaningless statement unless further context is offered. Without elaboration, it makes as much sense as saying everything is volume. We hear this statement being made in defense of many different pseudoscientific ideas, including the law of attraction, morphic resonance, universal awareness, ESP, pantheism, crystal power, and many others. The majority of these ideas would require radically different sets of undiscovered fundamental laws, in other words, they conflict with each other. They can't all be true, yet they all use this same platform from which to launch their unsupported nonsense without bothering to distinguish themselves beyond the idea that everything is energy. The statement becomes a shorthand way of saying "my pet thoery is supported by science". Remember, in strict technical terms, energy is a measurement."

I'm not qualified to speak on physics. But isn't dark energy and dark matter, energy that can not be quantified? But it's there because of how the universe moves. Not sure how accepted this theory is.

Yes, it is said to be Conserved. So, all of physics seems to be based on these basic principles. In fact, these Energies you mention are extrapolated directly from the Conservation principles.

The form of it changes, especially since the "volume" of the universe, it's expansion rate is actually, measurably accelerating. Space is sort of filling in, everywhere. The inch is getting longer by an almost incalculable amount. Almost. Bigger volume for Energy to spread out in, and obey the Laws, therefore, "weaker." Forces act at cubes, squares, etc, of Distance. More Distance, less Force. The Law.

Then it gets truly odd as the volume has pushed the distances so the atomic weak Force, just lets go, matter flies apart.

More oddly still, as the matter dissolves, so do all references to volume, also disappear. No reference. No volume.

Well. Now all this Energy flying around has no space, no time, no volume, no reference. So, Energy is suddenly STRONG!!! Ultimate, instant compression of the universe's energy into a mathematical point, is what?

BANG! Energy instantly creates Matter (and a new universe, ho hum,) to have volume reference to spread out again.

Is it Intelligent?

The math works, that's all it means.

I think the core to the statement "everything is energy" is meant to actually be "everything was once in the form of "usable" energy as we know it". It took a lot of energy in the form of mass and gravity to get the Earth to be what it is, at it took huge amounts of energy to create "heavy" elements.

I think the water cycle is a good example. It takes a gain or release of energy to get through the cycle, yet do we say "water is energy", no, but it obviously could be used to once again generate "usable" energy.

Your new paragraph sounds good.

Heisenberg said:

Thanks guys. I am going to abandon that paragraph until I get a better grasp on that particular aspect.

Click to expand...

Bro, if you get it figured out there's a Nobel prize in it for you. Good stuff in this thread. Yes the expansion of the universe is still accelerating - why? Dark matter is the only current theory that hasn't been debunked as far as I know.

Everything is energy and uncertainty at the quantum level. But the heat death (thermodynamic equilibrium) awaits all.... that's what perplexes me... Seems if you can make a universe you could make it so it won't run out of gas.