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] |
As I indicated last night, the expression Q+W is likely to be
responsible for a misconception that work is a form of energy.
If Q was interpreted to be a form of work instead of energy, would
the expression Q+W still lead to the misconception that W is a form
of energy (since the left-hand side is energy)? I'm thinking of a
similar conception regarding F=ma, i.e., that ma is a form of force.
In my sequence Q would be introduced in calorimetry. How
can it be "interpreted" as force*distance?
Absolutely, Robert. If in these discussions we would stop
reifying energy
and Q and saying things like "flow", converted, and
transferred, then the
understanding of the matter would grow.