Re: The energy

[Jim Green <JMGreen@SISNA.COM>]

> I have great respect for Michael's grasp of physics, but it is my
> judgment that in holding this opinion he commits a heresy, and by
> teaching it to his students he commits a venial sin.
>
> The orthodox view, which I hold to be correct: The energy is not
> substantial; it is not a real entity. The energy is an abstraction. The
> energy did not exist before it was invented. The energy is a state
> function, a quantity which may be calculated for any isolated physical
> system from the values of all the parameters that characterize its
> state.

Oh, Leigh, font of much knowledge, the above is clearly valid -- You could
have given credit to Thomas Young, wasn't it, for the invention of the idea
of energy.

But then you embrace the Feynman block parable.  Leigh, true enough energy
is not a substance -- it does not flow nor can it be tossed out a window
nor is it a block nor should it be represented by blocks.  The Feynman
parable is not helpful in my world.

> It is appropriate that I cite scripture at this point: Feynman I: 4-1.
> If you have not read this short (less than two pages) parable and given
> it the contemplation it deserves, I recommend you do so.

Jim


Jim Green
mailto:JMGreen@sisna.com
http://users.sisna.com/jmgreen