Re: refutation of the nonreality of energy

[Jim Green <JMGreen@SISNA.COM>]

At 11:20 PM 8/4/99 -0700, Leigh wrote:
> I have a small quibble with Jim which I will raise here. Jim said
> charge doesn't flow; I disagree. I can make a propellor which
> measures the passage of charge, a loop which exploits Ampere's law
> to measure DC current.

I acknowledge that any discrepancy between me an Leigh is only a
quibble:  In the case of "heat" and "energy" we agree.

Leigh, let us have a short sidebar:  You can detect the flow of charged
_particles_  these particles have the _property_ of "charge", but you can't
measure "pure charge" in deed there is no such thing -- just as there is no
such thing as "pure energy" or "pure mass" or "pure  blue" (unless you find
one of those ancient bottles of bluing in the laundry aisle in the grocery
store -- the stuff my mother used to use in the wash)

You can't have a "property" without a "system" to exhibit the property.

And now to beat the list with this again:  the idea of "energy" can only
make sense as it is a property of a system:  it can not exist, move, or
flow, by itself.

And, Leigh, in the same light, I don't have a meaning for "charge flow"
unless there is a "charged particle" which moves.


Jim Green
mailto:JMGreen@sisna.com
http://users.sisna.com/jmgreen