Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
The "flow" definition I gave on this list is perfectly consistent with a
commonsense notion of how matter flows. It is also perfectly consistent
with a correct notion of how energy flows.
>I simply asked if you tell your students what "flow" means when you use the
>term vis a vis energy.
I never knew I had to tell them what flow means.
I consider energy to be a particular type of incorporeal stuff. I consider
flow to be more-or-less a particular type of moving, although "moving" has
slightly different connotations than "flowing".
I have repeatedly formulated the local conservation law as
change(stuff inside boundary) = -flow(stuff outward across boundary)
in which the RHS quite explicitly refers to stuff flowing. I still
consider this formulation to be correct and clear.
My goal is to write so that people who want to understand will
understand. If there are others who want to misunderstand, I'm sure they
can find a way to misunderstand; that's not my problem.