Re: ENERGY WITH Q

[Ludwik Kowalski <kowalskiL@MAIL.MONTCLAIR.EDU>]

The conflict would disappear (as far as introductory courses are
concerned) if we agree to abandon the deltaU=Q+W. The First
and the Second laws can be introduced without subdividing the
total energy lost by a system into two artificially defined parts.
I suggest we move this issue to a more advanced course.

What is wrong with this? Don't we already have too many
topics in the introductory courses? I am not saying that issue
you are addressing is not important, we should resolve it but
not in the context of the first physics course. Do you agree?
Ludwik Kowalski

Jim Green wrote:

>  If in these discussions we would stop reifying energy and
> Q and saying things like "flow", converted, and transferred,
> then the understanding of the matter would grow.  Somewhere
> in the synapses of our bodies very unhelpful language of the
> past  is locked -- perhaps for  ever.
> deltaE(U if you prefer) = Q + W is strongly related  to the
> W/E principle and is easily derived from N#2
>
> Q is _not_ energy!
>
> Both Q and W are _work_! .......