Re: HEAT1=HEAT2 ?

[Leigh Palmer <palmer@sfu.ca>]

> I would certainly vote for leaving the usage of 'heat' alone in the
> introductory texts.  If there really is a concensus, then perhaps some
> pressure could be placed on the writers/editors of 'University Physics'
> texts for more 'precise' use, but leave the 'College Physics' and high
> school texts alone.  It seems to me that to limit the usage of 'heat' to
> the classical thermodynamics meaning would only obfuscate the topic for
> non-majors.  For these beginning students, we need to work from their
> experiences and their vocabulary and the common treatments in introductory
> texts tend to do this.

....and while we're at it, why distinguish between "mass" and "weight"?
The supermarkets here don't, quoting both weight in pounds and mass in
kilograms on their signs. Our insistence on using the proper term is
surely considered pedantic by these students, and we musn't appear to
be pedantic!

> As far as changing the word in thermodynamics,  if we think physics majors
> are too dumb to understand that 'heat' has a much more restrictive meaning
> in this context, then we could change it.

I would prefer to think that we are dealing with students capable of
overcoming confusions brought on by vulgar use of terms like "heat",
"work", and "weight". I managed to do so, and I've had many students
brighter than I. I don't think it is too much to expect that they will
be able to do what I did.

Leigh