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] |
>To see acceptable alternatives to current language, take a look at how
>Bohren and Albrecht handle this issue in many different contexts in
>their "Atmospheric Thermodynamics" book (ISBN: 0-19-509904-4).
Bohren and Albrecht avoid the word "heat" mainly by substituting
"change in enthalpy".
This works nicely for constant-pressure
processes when no "other" work (besides compression/expansion work)
is being done. By and large, I think they've made the right
decision, given their audience and the scope of their book.
But I don't think this way of avoiding "heat" would be feasible
in a typical course for physics or chemistry students.
There are
just too many processes where Q is not equal to Delta-H, so we
need separate names for the two quantities.
Maybe we ought to listen
and find some way to improve the language for generations to come. I've
tried to re-write some of my labs with this injunction in mind, and it is
_hard_. It is one thing to object to current language usage, and quite
another to propose acceptable alternatives. I need help with the latter.