Re: heat is "real", but...

[Larry Woolf <larry.woolf@GAT.COM>]

> On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Larry Woolf wrote:
>
> > "When you grasp that heating is a way of doing something and abandon all
> > attempts to identify heat as an entity, especially a vague, metaphysical,
> > even paranormal entity, you can think more clearly about thermodynamic
> > problems.  We know of no examples in which invoking a mythical substance
> > called heat leads to increased physical understanding."
>
> Hmmm.  Sounds like a straw man argument.  And should we also say that
> sound is "not a noun," and neither is light, because there are no mythical
> SUBSTANCES called sound or light?
>
> But who insists that "heat" is a substance?  Perhaps words are being put
> into the mouths of the "heat believers" to make their viewpoint look
> foolish.  Heat is only "substance-like"  in that it is a conserved
> quantity in some circumstances.

If heat is a conserved quantity, define heat and the conservation law that
it obeys. Bohren's point is that almost all situations can be better
described by using temperature instead of heat.  Temperature is well
defined.  Heat is not.

Dr. Lawrence D. Woolf; Phone: (858)-455-4475; www.sci-ed-ga.org
General Atomics; 3550 General Atomics Court; San Diego CA 92121-1194