Is energy always conserved?

While we may not think energy is *always* conserved; from my perspective it *is always* conserved, we just don't understand why that is true... yet.

Since everything comes from the void, and will return to the void, that sounds like absolute conservation to me.  The fact that complexity interferes with that path has no bearing on the ultimate return to void.  That new particles come into existence all the time also has no bearing on this except as creation from the void.  A new particle doesn't always get annihilated by it's own twin immediately, but together as a sum of energy, they represent the void, having come from the void.  Though having the appearance of being anti-matter like, they are not anti-matter in the classical sense, they are true opposites.

The ultimate return to void of light energy appears to be ultimately returned to the cosmos by the creation of new particle twins out of the void.  Conservation at its finest.  if we think of new particle creation of wavelets, in that all things can be described as a wave function, then new particle creation is simply wave interference constructively being expressed by the void. (By nature, all things are connected to the void at zero point.  In our 3D space-time, zero point is the great projector of the 2D holographic plate, which is the 2D boundary of a zero mass virtual black hole.)  If we think of the void as a zero point in space time, similar to a black hole but with no mass.  Then all zero points in space are connected to every other zero point in Space time (a fractal black hole).  The primary parametric which separates one wave from another is it's phase.  Where constructive, particle pairs are created, ultimately destroyed but that destruction is separated by space time, and is phase dependent outside of zero point. This phase, bound parametrically in all manifestations of energy, all particles, and all wave functions, is constructive and de-constructive by its nature outside the black hole, virtual or otherwise with, or without, mass.

Black hole zero points, having mass, exhibit as a 1D point in space-time but have a 2D effect at what appears to be a surface in 3D.  But, if the gravitational boundary of the Schwartz-field radius is examined, we discover that it is curved and there is no 3D space-time 'inside' this 2D surface boundary, all 3D space is observed outside of it (the lens effect).  To define the 'area' inside a black hole would be the same as defining a void.  This is why all zero points are connected in a dimension higher than zero, because outside of space-time or inside(sic) there is only void.

As light approaches the Schwartz-field radius of the cosmos (the cosmic limit), galaxies appear much like they would an object falling into a black hole.  Forever on the surface, but giving the appearance of being stretched out as they approach that boundary until they wink out, all light of that galaxy, all matter, all wave function, now a part of the void (a true collapse), contributing to the continual creation of the cosmos, emanating from zero point, continuously expanding, the point of it's creation, particles continuously winking in and out of the zero point (returning to void), or continually existing separate until it returns to the void (true entanglement), each possessing a phase relative to zero point, each other, and all matter and space-time.

Two twin particles coming into existence from the void either return immediately to the void, or they escape to be attracted by the Schwartz-field boundary of the cosmos, among other phase related effects (magnetism, gravity, etc.).   It is only natural that in time, as galaxies existing as a time-relative boundary of the cosmos, appear to speed up, until they reach the speed of light, at which point they hit the boundary and forever join the void, only to be returned in twin particle formations at what appear as random points.   This process is one of continual creation.

From this the only question that remains is, what is defined by a black hole that exists within a black hole?   The answer seems obvious once one realizes, that all reality as we observe it as a type of holographic projection with zero point, the void, connecting everything existing as a great projector.  A simulation of this would exist in concept as memory in a computer, that could not be observed by the contents.  Each point is connected to every other point.  Each point has a value determined by one: the phase, and two: an energy level determined as 1 at maximum such that  its relative phase and value is determined by the constructive and deconstructive sum of all phases at that point in space-time in which the entirety of it's phase exists and having a potential value to return to void.   In the multi-dimensional aspect, all points in space-time are both uniquely differentiated, and yet simultaneously relative to the same point (zero point, or void).  The ether of the cosmos which is simultaneously noether, is the void.   All physical science is derived from illusions created from the interaction of phase construction and de-construction, much like and similar to moire' effects seen in 2D moire' images, and holographic plates.    It is not lost on me that I've just said, we actually exist inside(sic) of a black hole which contains the entire mass of the cosmos.  Indeed there is much to be considered how that mass may appear to exist, from our perspective, outside of the black hole itself.

I remember reading of an experiment to be done at one of the Super-Colliders where scientists were to attempt to discover the 2d surface of the active phase boundary at zero point.  I know I bookmarked this (along with thousands of bookmarks) this experiment; but I've yet to locate it.  I kept waiting for news of this experiment,  and eagerly await results but have neither seen nor read any news of it.  I would be surprised if that level could be resolved, nevertheless I remain hopeful.  I suspect it will encounter the typical measurement problems to the extreme.  The results could simply produce twin particle creation and immediate annihilation unless it existed in an environment that allowed them to escape each other.  I do not know what that would be; :-/  a virtual black hole with a very small mass?  

Bottom line, while we may not think energy is *always* conserved; from my perspective it *is always* conserved, we just don't understand why that is true... yet.