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] |
Later they claim:
"If we claim that energy is stored in the gravitational field, and if a
change in energy content is indicated by some change in the thing
that stores it, then what changes in the field when it gains
or loses energy?
R. McDermott wrote in part:
| The central theme is that the energy must reside somewhere.
| Taken in that
| context, the only "place" for it to be is in the field itself.
|
I don't understand the *must*; why not say it resides in the
configuration of the system.
The change in the thing is . . . The
"thing" would be the two body system, the change in the thing would be
its configuration. For point-like objects that would be its separation
distance. Much like a mass-spring system.
They appear to me to be coming dangerously close to re-enforcing a fluid
& container model of energy; i.e. reifying the idea to a possibly
dangerous degree. Though I must admit to only a cursory glance at the
document.