Results 1 to 10 of 69
Hybrid View
-
07-01-2011, 10:19 PM #1
Actualll\y that was, I think, all kinetic energy means. The scientific community distinguishes it clearly from heat energy.
Kinetic energy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
No doubt we will hear from gssixgun if the corrosion experienced in this test is hard to remove. I think it won't be.
Alcohol will be colder than the air if evaporation is taking place, and many people have been convinced (although imputing to it the wrong effect, I believe) that it is.
-
07-01-2011, 10:51 PM #2
The quote is talking about the molecular level, and the molecules certainly have kinetic energy regardless of whether or not one would say the alcohol has kinetic energy as a system. There is nothing incorrect about that statement.
If you want to look at wikipedia, look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat and search the page for "kinetic."Last edited by holli4pirating; 07-01-2011 at 10:53 PM.
-
07-02-2011, 12:10 AM #3
I thought this thread was going to be about another SRP get-together
Find me on SRP's official chat in ##srp on Freenode. Link is at top of SRP's homepage
-
07-02-2011, 03:53 AM #4
-
07-02-2011, 06:02 PM #5
That quote refers to heat energy added to a system being stored as kinetic energy of the particles. Atomic energy, far greater in magnitude, exists in the bonds that hold the atoms together. But heat is not being added, and atoms are not being split. This is a distraction from the valuable information we have seen in this experiment.
-
07-02-2011, 08:02 PM #6
If heat energy added to a system can be stored as kinetic energy of the particles, that means that, if the system has heat energy, the particles will have kinetic energy. It's as simple as - the particles are moving, and therefore they have kinetic energy. Also, the potential energy being referenced is most likely not a reference to atomic energy; it is probably to do with phase or some other physical arrangement (but that is off topic).
If you really want to say that moving particles don't have kinetic energy, that's fine, but every physicist I've ever met (including all the ones I worked with at FNAL) will completely disagree with you.
-
07-02-2011, 08:07 PM #7
I am delighted to see hair-splitting going on in this thread.
(I bet nobody's made THAT joke around here before...)-Zak Jarvis. Writer. Artist. Bon vivant.
-
07-02-2011, 08:18 PM #8
Have you ever poured that stuff in a good cut? Talk about your kinetic energy!!!!!!!!
"Don't be stubborn. You are missing out."
I rest my case.
-
07-02-2011, 09:14 PM #9