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]

Re: [Phys-l] Configurational energy



Hugh Haskell wrote, in part:
"Chabay and Sherwood use "interaction energy" and I kind of like that.

It seems to me to be more direct than configuration energy, although
it looks pretty synonymous to me."

"Configurational energy" provides more information than "interaction
energy", because it implies that the energy is not only due to an
interaction between two or more objects, but that it is due to the
configuration of these objects, as well.

I used to say that kinetic energy is the energy an object has due to
its motion, and that potential energy was the energy that it has due to
its position. These explanations were fairly common when I started
teaching physics 20 years ago. I found the latter explanation to be
inadequate, because students did not appreciate that potential energy
was associated with a system, rather than with a single object.
Potential energy is the energy associated with the configuration of a
system, not the position of a single object. This was why I started
using the phrase "configurational energy".

Daniel Crowe
Loudoun Academy of Science
dan.crowe@loudoun.k12.va.us