Harry Veeder wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Michel Jullian wrote:
>>> Paul,
>>>
>>> 1/ If you think the potential vs potential energy remark was just
>> humor, you are showing great ignorance. Look up the definition of
>> voltage = electric potential:
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_potential
>>>
>>> "Electric potential is the potential energy per unit of charge
>> associated with a static (time-invariant) electric field, also called
>> the electrostatic potential, typically measured in volts."
>>> and then tell me if you click "voltage" and delete it too :)
>>>
>>> 2/ You seem to be eluding my question wrt the formulation of KE in
>> terms of work (below). Click "everything that doesn't fit" and
delete it?
>>> Michel
>>
>>
>> This is too funny. I keep telling you standard physics has no idea,
>> which is why they call it PE. Again, E-field is detectable, has
>> location, occupies space, and we can calculate its energy. If one
>> considers E-fields as PE then they truly believe everything is PE,
>> including KE. KE is detectable, has location, occupies space, and we
>> can calculate its energy. "Gee, lets call everything PE. Look at that
>> comet moving across the sky. Gosh, that's potential energy, therefore
>> lets call it potential energy."
>>
>> Paul Lowrance
>>
>
> Why stop there? Lets call everything energy.
>
> ...I ate energy for lunch.
>
> ...Your energy needs fixing.
>
> ...Remember to take the energy for a walk!
>
> ...He dove into the energy.
>
> ...Why not sell your labour? After all it is just energy.
Because it's more complex than that. You call a burrito to identify the
food. The E-field is no more PE than a piece of mass moving at a
certain velocity. If one is referring to an E-field then call it energy,
and if you want to identify it then call it what it is, an E-field.
Present POV of PE in the physics community is shaky at best. Here are a
few quotes -->
Michel wrote, "We can't tell how much intrinsic PE there is in the
weight because we don't know on which planet we are going to let it
fall, agreed?"
Michel wrote, "I wonder if PE shouldn't be viewed as a property of the
universe rather than of an object."
The point of this thread is that PE should not be view as a special case
or property of the universe. Two attracted electro-magnets accelerating
toward each other perfectly demonstrates such a concept. It requires
energy to accelerate such objects, and such energy is moved from the
source that sustains the electro-magnets current.
Regards,
Paul Lowrance
