| 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] |
I am somewhat concerned about the words "converted to" in the
definition of energy. Suppose I consider a block of wood that is
sliding on a wooden table top. The block slows down and I can feel
that is warmer than before. The gross kinetic energy of the block (a
known type) has been converted to internal energy (consider this the
new unknown type). However, your definition seems to require that I
be able to convert the new type to the old. Don't I run into all the
old 2nd Law problems defining energy if I attempt to do this?
Wouldn't "converted to or from" cause fewer problems when extending
energy to new types?