Re: CONSERVATION OF ENERGY

[brian whatcott <inet@intellisys.net>]

At 08:47 7/17/97 EDT, Ludwik wrote:

> For work and heat we now have operational definitions, such c*m*dT, and 
> this helps (I think) with the very abstract concept of energy. Do we have 
> an alternative scientific way of INTRODUCING energy?
>
>                                       Ludwik Kowalski
 At the time and place where I was 12 years old, the class would be set
problems of this kind:
I mix 140 grams of water at 30 degC with 50 grams of water at 70 degC.
 What is the final temperature, neglecting losses?

The formulaic method offered was this:
Mass times S times Rise in Temperature = Mass times S times Fall in
Temperature

S was of course the specific heat capacity. There was no great definition of 
terms; although I do recall a brief discussion:
"If you sit on a wooden seat in the snow outside, then on the iron seat
beside it, which is colder?"

 I suspect that a fun or off-beat intrduction to energy might be an
examination of perpetual motion machines. The search for functional
examples by scientists did not cease til around the middle of the 19th
century - and the end of the search depended on the formulation of the
conservation of energy rule.

Regards
brian whatcott <inet@intellisys.net>
Altus OK