Re: HEAT1=HEAT2 ?

["Richard W. Tarara" <rtarara@saintmarys.edu>]

> Leigh responded to Rick:
 
> ...and while we're at it, why distinguish between "mass" and "weight"?
> The supermarkets here don't, quoting both weight in pounds and mass in
> kilograms on their signs. Our insistence on using the proper term is
> surely considered pedantic by these students, and we musn't appear to
> be pedantic!

It's pendantic (in the negative sense) if it doesn't serve to further
understanding and/or to provide utilitarian benefits.  The differentiation
of mass and weight at the introductory level is an essential piece of the
curriculum (both conceptually and for problem solving).  I don't see the
typical intro student as quite ready for the kinds of differentiations
(heat, to heat, thermal energy, internal energy, heat flow or not heat
flow, Q in calorimetry, Q in entropy, etc.) that have been discussed here
and which are certainly important for the advanced student.   Would being
pendatic on this point really improve introductory physics courses?  I've
voted NO.
 
> > As far as changing the word in thermodynamics,  if we think physics
majors
> > are too dumb to understand that 'heat' has a much more restrictive
meaning
> > in this context, then we could change it.
>
> I would prefer to think that we are dealing with students capable of
> overcoming confusions brought on by vulgar use of terms like "heat",
> "work", and "weight". I managed to do so, and I've had many students
> brighter than I. I don't think it is too much to expect that they will
> be able to do what I did.
Actually my point--trying to be sarcastic, which never come across well on
e-mail.
> Leigh

Rick