The universe cools as it expands. What about the energy conservation law?

That's a great question, and the answer is more subtle than the simplistic answers that some other responders have given.

This exact question is examined in depth by Physicist Tamara M. Davis in her article, "Is the Universe Leaking Energy?", in the July, 2010 issue of Scientific American.

Her answer is more or less, "it depends on how you look at it." She says that since the universe as a whole is not time-symmetric (i.e. its geometry evolves over time) we can't expect conservation laws (which depend on time symmetry) to hold. A quote from the article:

"Conservation laws are intimately tied to symmetries of nature. In particular, energy is conserved when the laws of nature have “time symmetry.” Time symmetry is said to occur if any experiment gives the same results regardless of when it is performed. But if experiments can give different results at different times, energy may not be conserved. An example is playing a bank shot on a pool table that has a changing geometry. At cosmological scales, our universe has a changing geometry, which once again implies that energy may not be conserved."

However, she says that it's also possible to treat cosmic redshift mathematically like Doppler redshift, in which case the "cooling" photons are not necessarily really cooling, depending on the reference frame from which they're observed.

It's a little over my head, but worth a read. You can see a preview of the article here (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=i... ), but to read the whole article you will either have to scare up a copy of the issue, or purchase the article (for a few dollars) from the Scientific American website.

The gigantic band is a concept that attempts to provide an explanation for the opening of the universe. But like other theories it can't be presumed to be the whole story. Each other concept turns into modified or elevated as we study more about it. So yet another reply is that we're unable to replicate any stipulations that would create matter or vigor from nothing. Thus how are they fashioned? The regulation of conservation of vigor and matter quite simply says "they aren't." They exist. They'll have consistently existed. They are going to constantly exist someday. If the big bang is entirely right then possibly they were created then. If not then whatever can have existed previous to that. Do not seem for absolute solutions considering the fact that they don't exist.

If we rely on the assumption that the universe is composed only of photons, really do not know what happens to the law of conservation of energy. The problem is still not well understood complexity of the universe. To the try to simplify it we will find more questions than answers.

Best regards.

It accounts for the expansion of the Universe. You are considering temperature as energy via Boltzman statistics (& constant).

Hola Pneuma: si entendi tu pregunta mi mejor respuesta es esta :

http://ar.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=At...

Saludos

Temperature is energy density. Lower temperature is not necessarily a reduction in energy.

.

The energy is still there, just more spread out because spacetime is expanding.

Same energy but spread over a wider area.

I never thought about that thats a really good question that kind of blew my mind