Re: Energy <=> Money

[Rob Davies <rodavies@DU.EDU>]

> Date:    Fri, 13 Aug 1999 13:02:58 -0500
> From:    Timothy Folkerts <tfolkert@TIGER.FHSU.EDU>
> Subject: Energy <=> Money

> I think the analogy to money is highly profitable in bridging the gap
> between "energy is stuff that flows" to "energy is an abstract property of
> a system [...snip...]
> Now with e-commerce, the analogy is even better.  When my pay check is
> electronically deposited, there is no way to localize where my money is or
> was.  When I use a debit card, there is no money "in" the card, but some
> credit is transfered from my account to the retailer's account.  You can't
> follow the money from one account and see it cross a boundary, but it used
> to be in one place and now it is in another.

I like Tim's analogy. Allow me to take it in a slightly different direction.

Not all transactions are done via e-commerce. There are plenty of situation in which the flow of money is not abstract. For example, I hand bills from my wallet to a cashier. He in turn gives those bills as change to the next customer. That person uses those bills to pay for goods at another establishment.

Similarly, could it be that it is useful (Dare I say, "correct"?) to speak of energy flow in some cases (e.g. charged capacitor carried across the room) and not in others?

Rob "Take the Middle Path" Davies