Dear Jim and All,
I think that the word 'power' has more problems other than those that you
refer to in physics.
Consider these sentences:
The government, which is a nuclear power, has the power to order the
electricity company to supply power to essential services during the power
strike. According to the chief electrical engineer the power usage has been
increasing according to a power formula, and he added that it was not within
his power to change it.
I don't think that I have used the word 'power' in any way that a physicist
might recognise using a strict physics definition of 'power'.
Insofar as the teaching problem is concerned, I think that the problems that
arise with different sorts of power comes from misunderstanding of the
nature of energy.
Cheers,
Pat Naughtin
CAMS - Certified Advanced Metrication Specialist
- United States Metric Association
ASM - Accredited Speaking Member
- National Speakers Association of Australia
Member, International Federation for Professional Speakers
--
on 2002/03/08 03.55, James R. Frysinger at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Duncan Bath wrote:
>>
>> This whole business of 'power' must be mystifying to members of the
>> general public. They read (or hear) of h.p., W, kW, Btu/hr and so on. The
>> incentive to really come to grips with this technical stuff must be pretty
>> well blunted from day 1.
>> Duncan
>
> I cannot sufficiently express how frustratingly difficult it is to
> teach students that the concept of power crosses into many areas:
> electrical, mechanical, thermal, etc. For American students, an obvious
> source of confusion is the plethora of units that are commonly used, as
> you have put it above, Duncan. Indeed, they sometimes try to tell me
> that "these powers are different" on the basis of the differing units. I
> wonder how my experience compares to that of instructors in physics
> classrooms in metricated countries.
>
> Jim
