> (1)the CM Work/KE theorem of mechanics, and
> (2)the First Law of Thermodynamics.
But wait, there's more:
(0) the microscopic work/KE theorem of mechanics.
Note I didn't say "CM work".
Item (0) is what I call "the" work/KE theorem. I
believe this is 100% standard terminology.
I would call item (1) the pseudowork/pseudoKE theorem.
I recognize that
delta pseudoKE = pseudowork
is a valid expression, but it needs to be stated
properly. IMHO it would be a reeeeeally sloppy
shorthand to call the LHS "the" KE or to call the
RHS "the" work. I shudder to think of it. It's
like nails screeching on the chalkboard.
Pseudowork is not equal to the total work that
appears in item (0), nor is it equal to the W
(also standardly called work) that appears in
the alleged "W+Q" law of thermodynamics.
I agree that it is very unfortunate to have more
than one thing called "work".
0) the microscopic mechanical work
1) the mechanical pseudowork, which at least
one person calls work, as I discovered
yesterday.
2) the thermodynamic "W" work.
With such messed-up terminology, it's a wonder
that anyone is ever able to communicate with
anybody.