To a physicist, conservation of energy means?

Question

A> use of natural resources must be controlled
B>during a physical change, total energy remains constant
C>a cautious approach to particle bombardment is recommended
D) solid-state rather than electron materials are used

Answer 1

As a nuclear physicist Conservation of Energy isn't enough. You have to include mass since they have an equivalance given by E=mc^2.

In a particle collision the total amount of mass/energy equivalance in conserved. In fact we never refer to particles as having a mass in kg. Rather we refer to mass in energy, using MeV or GeV... http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/particles/quark.html


So in answer to your question B & C are correct.

Answer 2

During any change of state, energy is conserved and hence B is the closest to the correct answer. And if you take law of conservation of mass and energy, nothing is ever lost. Matter may get converted into energy and vice versa and energy may change its type but there is no leakage of mass and or energy from the universe (as per the present state of knowledge).

Answer 3

When you conserve anything (mass, energy, momentum etc.) , it means that its "amount" at the beginning and end of the event is the same.
Therefore the answer is B.

Answer 4

A physicist probably wouldn't say: "conservation of energy"..

They would probably say: "conservation of energy AND MATTER" due to the theory of relativity.
(Nuclear reactors and stars convert matter into energy.)

Otherwise the answer would be "B"
.

Answer 5

In our political correct world what passes for most physicists these day, they would probably answer A.

Answer 6

Uhh, (B)?