Re: dW turns into dQ

[Bob Sciamanda <trebor@VELOCITY.NET>]

Joel wrote:
> That would be one way, but also you might stick a thermometer into the
water
> and measure its temperature rise.

Sure, that's what I'd do, too - but my point is that this is even farther
removed (in the other direction!) from the system boundary where the
energy entered.
Furthermore, the fluid temperature change measures the total (thermal) dE,
without regard as to whether it entered as dQ or dW.  A further indication
that the distinction is of no practical import in this case; it is dE
which is important.

(I was previously speaking of what an engineer would consider in designing
the system, ie.; he would be concerned with Eit = i^2*Rt)

> unfortunately I am both the teacher and student to myself and I force
myself
> to choos between purely philosphical interpretations.  I don't really
know
> any other way to proceed.  I try to understand a current paradigm by
trying
> to understand the definitions and epistemology implicit in the paradigm
and
> trying to make sense of it; relating it of course to reality which is
the
> final arbiter; this often causes cognitive dissonance.  Rousing
discussions,
> of the type found here, help the process immensely.
Sure, and don't "reify the model" - it is created as an aid to
understanding, but can often have the unintended consequence of provoking
meaningless questions and other sources of confusion.  I must again append
one of my favorite quotes (below.

Bob

Bob Sciamanda (W3NLV)
Physics, Edinboro Univ of PA (em)
trebor@velocity.net
http://www.velocity.net/~trebor

"In the hard sciences we mostly talk about models rather than laws.  And
if you talk to the people who are working on foundations of mathematics,
they also talk about models.  It's certainly true of physics and astronomy
in particular that a law is just a model that we've got used to.   . . . I
have enormous respect for Stephen Hawking, but I sometimes think he
doesn't know the difference between a model and the real thing.  That's an
occupational disease of theoretical physicists."
Freeman Dyson in ("A Glorious Accident", W. Kayzer ed.)