Re: [Phys-L] let's define energy

[Marty Weiss <martweiss@comcast.net>]

Ok... transferred.  It's an easy enough word to use for 11th graders (lower level classes).  

On Sep 29, 2015, at 5:00 PM, John Denker wrote:

> On 09/29/2015 01:09 PM, Marty Weiss wrote:
> > I meant "lost" in the sense that it is no longer useful to do
> > something.   Why does the car stop?  The energy is "lost" to heat,
> > etc.  Students can understand conservation but they need something
> > concrete to be able to say why the car stopped.  Thus I use "lost" in
> > quotes to indicate the energy is not useful.
>
> Maybe I'm being overly sensitive, but still I suggest
> that "lost" is not the optimal description.  Usually
> "transferred" is better.
>
> It pays to be somewhat sensitive, because in another
> part of this thread, we have Vokos and Scherr explicitly
> talking about "energy degradation and usefulness".  Ick.
>  http://spu.edu/depts/physics/documents/Daane.PhysRevSTPER.10.pdf