Re: "heat" is a bad word

[Jim Green <JMGreen@SISNA.COM>]

At 13:55 01 05 2002 , the following was  received:
> If you check the 5th edition of Serway & Beichner, you'll find that heat is
> basically treated as a process, in effect, as a verb. "Heat is the transfer
> of energy from one object to another object as a result of a difference in
> temperature between the two." pg 581. You can <I>heat</I> an object and
> increase its internal energy. Chapter 20 relates the difference between heat
> and internal energy to the difference between work and mechanical energy.
> You don't talk about the work <I>of</I> a system, just as you shouldn't talk
> about the heat of a system.

The authors  should be praised for this change.  We have now come a long
way from Aristotle and Carnot.  "Heat" is _done_ ; it is an action; it is
not a substance; it doesn't flow!

Now we should begin to emphasize the teaching the concept of "energy" --
Energy is not a substance either.  Energy  is not "transferred"  in the
sense that it flows or moves.  Of course, if the necessary carful preamble
is given, one may teach that by having two  systems do work  on each other
the energy level of one may decrease  while the energy level of the other
increases.

But why take the chance of confusing the students?

Energy doesn't flow or move either.

Jim Green
mailto:JMGreen@sisna.com
http://users.sisna.com/jmgreen