ENERGY

[steve_bank]

The journey of a thousand posts begins with a thread.

What is energy? Can you get a container of energy?

 

[fromderinside]

Maybe I'm a bolt, but doesn't an electromagnetic field contain plasma for fusion work.

 

[Tigers!]

The journey of a thousand posts begins with a thread.

What is energy? Can you get a container of energy?

Perhaps it might be better to say you can get a container with energy?

 

[fast]

The journey of a thousand posts begins with a thread.

What is energy? Can you get a container of energy?

Hot mass

ETA: and yes

 

[steve_bank]

What do you think energy is?

 

[fast]

What do you think energy is?

If A is X (the solid state of water), ice
If B is Y (the liquid state of water), water
If C is Z (the gas state of water), gas
Where water is D

Then mass is like X and energy is like Z

So, mass and energy are both the same yet different. Mass and energy is the same in the sense both ice and gas are both water but different in that they are in different states.

 

[skepticalbip]

The journey of a thousand posts begins with a thread.

What is energy?

Energy is the difference between two entropic states.
Example:
... A one pound weight lifted one foot above the ground has been given one foot-pound of potential energy.

Can you get a container of energy?

Interesting question. Can you get a container of velocity?

 

[steve_bank]

The journey of a thousand posts begins with a thread.

What is energy?

Energy is the difference between two entropic states.
Example:
... A one pound weight lifted one foot above the ground has been given one foot-pound of potential energy.

Can you get a container of energy?

Interesting question. Can you get a container of velocity?

Close. You are making progress.

Energy is the capacity to work, and work is force times distance.

In the 1800s Joule performed the paddle wheel experiment that showed heat, work, and energy could be expressed in a common term, today the Joule,

Foot-pounds are obsolete. In the English system there is pounds mass and pounds force, confusing.

Force is newtons, and mass is kilograms. Force = mass x acceleration.

I asked a leading question on a package of energy.

Can you get a box of time or meters?

I can get a bucket of coal with a thermal energy equivalent in Joules. I can't get a bucket of change but I can quantify change with units of time, as Joules quantify energy. All are thought form abstractions.

If you are curious google paddle wheel experiment.

 

[skepticalbip]

Energy is the difference between two entropic states.
Example:
... A one pound weight lifted one foot above the ground has been given one foot-pound of potential energy.

Can you get a container of energy?

Interesting question. Can you get a container of velocity?

Close. You are making progress.

Energy is the capacity to work, and work is force times distance.

Yes, that is the definition generally given in a freshman physics class. However, it is limited and can be confusing for many when discussing energy. I prefer my more general definition. For example assume that you have a liter of water at 50 degrees Centigrade and a liter of water at 60 degrees Centigrade both in a single ideal Dewar flask. Wait until there is thermal equilibrium and both liters of water will be at 55 degrees Centigrade. There would have been no force through a distance involved but energy (five kilo calories) was transferred from one of the liters of water to the other liter of water.

Foot-pounds are obsolete. In the English system there is pounds mass and pounds force, confusing.

Force is newtons, and mass is kilograms. Force = mass x acceleration.

True, that is the currently most accepted system of units used but then the actual units used are pretty much irrelevant as long at there is consistency, familiarity, and ability to convert. I had a professor in one of my early physics classes who gave problems using units of furlongs, fortnights, and stones (or other imaginative systems) and required the answers in the MKS system just to drill into us the necessity of understanding the importance of units and conversion.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

There would have been no force through a distance involved but energy (five kilo calories) was transferred from one of the liters of water to the other liter of water.

Yes, but what exactly was transferred? The answer is motion.

 

[fast]

I asked a leading question on a package of energy.

But it's only a category error in appearance. The container itself is mass, and so too could its contents be. Is potential energy not already energy even before being put to work, or do you think it's as the name seemingly suggests: not energy now but can potentially become so?

 

[Speakpigeon]

The journey of a thousand posts begins with a thread.

What is energy? Can you get a container of energy?

Easy do.

Since Einstein, we know anything with mass is a container of energy: E = mc²
EB

 

[fast]

The journey of a thousand posts begins with a thread.

What is energy? Can you get a container of energy?

Easy do.

Since Einstein, we know anything with mass is a container of energy: E = mc²
EB

Is potential energy in fact energy? Or, is it something than can later potentially become energy?

 

[Juma]

The journey of a thousand posts begins with a thread.

What is energy? Can you get a container of energy?

Easy do.

Since Einstein, we know anything with mass is a container of energy: E = mc²
EB

Is potential energy in fact energy? Or, is it something than can later potentially become energy?

It is one form of energy. What is ”real” energy to you?

 

[fast]

Easy do.

Since Einstein, we know anything with mass is a container of energy: E = mc²
EB

Is potential energy in fact energy? Or, is it something than can later potentially become energy?

It is one form of energy. What is ”real” energy to you?

I'm not denying that potential energy is energy. I'm asking.

If the answer is yes, then okay, potential energy is energy. If the answer is no, then okay, potential energy is not energy.

What I'm being cautious about is the strangeness of the term "potential energy" as it highly suggests that potential energy is a type of energy, but names are deceptive. For instance, dwarf planets are not dwarf (adjective) planets (noun), instead dwarf planets (noun phrase) are dwarf planets (noun phrase).

Anyway, if potential energy is a form of energy (actual energy and not just something that can potentially become energy), then the container is itself both mass and energy.

This reminds me (vividly reminds me) of the issue I have with water. I have reason to deny that frozen H2O is water under an alternative paradigm.

 

[steve_bank]

The journey of a thousand posts begins with a thread.

What is energy? Can you get a container of energy?

Easy do.

Since Einstein, we know anything with mass is a container of energy: E = mc²
EB

Is potential energy in fact energy? Or, is it something than can later potentially become energy?

Any phenomena that can be shown to do work is called energy.

Water in a mountain lake has gravitational potential energy. Let the water fall ino a turbine and is has the kinetic energy 0.5 * mass * velocity^2.

Both conditions are quantified by the Joule. This means if the lake has X number of Joules in potential energy ignoring losses and efficenny the water can turn a generator to create X Joules of electric energy.

Th E in E = mc^2 is energy in Joules, the energy in an atom. If nuclear fuel rods in a rector have X Joules of energy, then ignoring efficiency the reactor can create X Joules of electric energy.

That work, heat, and energy are equivalent is a foundation of science and technology.

 

[steve_bank]

Energy is the difference between two entropic states.
Example:
... A one pound weight lifted one foot above the ground has been given one foot-pound of potential energy.

Interesting question. Can you get a container of velocity?

Close. You are making progress.

Energy is the capacity to work, and work is force times distance.

Yes, that is the definition generally given in a freshman physics class. However, it is limited and can be confusing for many when discussing energy. I prefer my more general definition. For example assume that you have a liter of water at 50 degrees Centigrade and a liter of water at 60 degrees Centigrade both in a single ideal Dewar flask. Wait until there is thermal equilibrium and both liters of water will be at 55 degrees Centigrade. There would have been no force through a distance involved but energy (five kilo calories) was transferred from one of the liters of water to the other liter of water.

Foot-pounds are obsolete. In the English system there is pounds mass and pounds force, confusing.

Force is newtons, and mass is kilograms. Force = mass x acceleration.

True, that is the currently most accepted system of units used but then the actual units used are pretty much irrelevant as long at there is consistency, familiarity, and ability to convert. I had a professor in one of my early physics classes who gave problems using units of furlongs, fortnights, and stones (or other imaginative systems) and required the answers in the MKS system just to drill into us the necessity of understanding the importance of units and conversion.

Before SI there was a hodgepodge of units. Rating an engine in watts is a lot easier than horsepower. I bdive the Europeans rate the jet engines in watts, which is joules/second.

If you have two masses of water at different temperature you can do work.

 

[fast]

Easy do.

Since Einstein, we know anything with mass is a container of energy: E = mc²
EB

Is potential energy in fact energy? Or, is it something than can later potentially become energy?

Any phenomena that can be shown to do work is called energy.

Water in a mountain lake has gravitational potential energy. Let the water fall ino a turbine and is has the kinetic energy 0.5 * mass * velocity^2.

Both conditions are quantified by the Joule. This means if the lake has X number of Joules in potential energy ignoring losses and efficenny the water can turn a generator to create X Joules of electric energy.

Th E in E = mc^2 is energy in Joules, the energy in an atom. If nuclear fuel rods in a rector have X Joules of energy, then ignoring efficiency the reactor can create X Joules of electric energy.

That work, heat, and energy are equivalent is a foundation of science and technology.

If two people argued such that one claimed water is energy and the other claimed water has energy, who do you agree with?

 

[steve_bank]

Is potential energy in fact energy? Or, is it something than can later potentially become energy?

Any phenomena that can be shown to do work is called energy.

Water in a mountain lake has gravitational potential energy. Let the water fall ino a turbine and is has the kinetic energy 0.5 * mass * velocity^2.

Both conditions are quantified by the Joule. This means if the lake has X number of Joules in potential energy ignoring losses and efficenny the water can turn a generator to create X Joules of electric energy.

Th E in E = mc^2 is energy in Joules, the energy in an atom. If nuclear fuel rods in a rector have X Joules of energy, then ignoring efficiency the reactor can create X Joules of electric energy.

That work, heat, and energy are equivalent is a foundation of science and technology.

If two people argued such that one claimed water is energy and the other claimed water has energy, who do you agree with?

Science is a set of definitions and relationships based on the definitions. Whether water possesses energy or 'it is energy' is semantics. Objectively energy, heat, and work can be measured, Anything beyond that is more philosophy and issues of the limitations of language for me. It is very difficult to objectively nail down with words, it is inherent to language.

In common speech power and energy are used interchangeably, yet are two different things.

I read Popper's book on objective knowledge. As he put it, objective science is limited to experimental demonstration. As discussion grows around experiment it gets progressively subjective.

There is a saying, 'science always works' meaning it doesn't matter how you discuss it the relationships and definitions are what matters.

My answer to your question, when confronted with semantics out in real world my response is always 'put it in an equation'.

 

[Artemus]

The journey of a thousand posts begins with a thread.

What is energy? Can you get a container of energy?

Easy do.

Since Einstein, we know anything with mass is a container of energy: E = mc²
EB

Is potential energy in fact energy? Or, is it something than can later potentially become energy?

Adding potential energy to a system increases the total mass of the system, so it is definitely in fact energy. See  Mass–energy equivalence and search for "Potential energy". For example,

A spring's mass increases whenever it is put into compression or tension. Its added mass arises from the added potential energy stored within it, which is bound in the stretched chemical (electron) bonds linking the atoms within the spring.