msp said:
One of the fundamental principles of physics is the "information" is never lost i.e. energy can be converted in to matter and matter into energy however nothing is ever lost...
True, true..but by observation only. The 'laws' of physics are by no mean immutable. They are essentially the best conclusions drawn based on what data is available
now. How do we know things might not change? Something new might be discovered.
By example, when Newton first developed equations for Classical Dynamics, energy (kinetic, for example) could be modeled by E = 1/2 mv^2. This worked perfectly for all practical purposes for hundreds of years. Then, come the advent of heavy-massed objects (or high-velocity), and this did not hold. Enter Einstein's relativity and that equation was more precisely realized as E = Y m c ^ 2 - m c ^ 2, where Y = 1/(1 - (V^2)/(c^2))^0.5 to account for all cases, low velocity (like we normally would use) but also high-velocity and high-mass frames. (c is the speed of light, 8 x 10^8 m/s) Plug in numbers, and see that the more complex reduces down to simply E = 1/2 mv^2 extremely well, but it's not absolutely correct, only an approximation.
So then, physics is a model - a tool, if you will. To describe what we observe. It is
not absolute truth. The reality of what is the truth may escape us, but for the meantime, physicists base their 'laws' on what is onhand with observational evidence.
In the nuclear furnace of a sun, matter undergoes fusion and transfers to a huge amount of energy, and energy 'particles' - neutrinos, photons, etc. So there is a definite output to the Sun on a mass basis - part of it's mass is converted to energy, which when leaves the Sun in the form of light, IR, EM, et al waves, particles, and is gone from the 'Sun' system. So unless there is a energy/mass input to the Sun, it will definitely shrink. Slowly, but it will according to what's known. But who's to say that the energy/matter will not be conserved? So far, it sure looks like this will not be changed since evidence supports it in our immediate realm of the Earth for obervation. What evidence is there from the Sun? The available data cannot provide sufficient evidence to prove energy will be conserved with sufficient precision, it's just assumed that it will be. Maybe you're not isolating the scope of your argument (what does the rule apply to?), but don't dogmatically state something will or will not happen if you have no proof behind it.
The Sun and fusion are really unproven for the fundamental laws, precision and ability to observe the entire system is simply not there, so we don't know what really happens. On one hand, scientific rigor and discpline should always be exercised, but putting down an honest question about the fundamental nature of anything like your response does, takes away the impulse to pursue intellectual curiosity - one of the human flaws that have bereaved dreams of realization of truth from those courageous enough to dream them. I'm certain this has occurred many times over the eons of human history.