Page 1 of 2

A quick high school science lesson.

Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2012 12:11 pm
by peter
While the Loresraat is quiet can I pick a few brains. Energy - what is it? I seem to remember it's being defined as the 'ability to do work' but what is it that does the work - and come to that, what's work. Come to that what is 'force'

I guess energy comes in different forms - heat, light, sound, electromagnetic (?), chemical - and is indestuctable and thus constant in it's total quantity (including mass as a form of energy). But what about heat. Heat is a measure of atomic/molecular movement and so must be a form of 'kinetic energy' ie the energy of movement. So does that mean that 'movement' is quite simply one of the most fundamental forms of energy. And by the same reasoning 'potential to move' things is the second form (ie potential) of energy. And this maybe is all it is. Movement and Potential to cause movement. I don't know - maybe I've just forgotten too much.

(If the temperature of a system measured in K is doubled does that mean it has twice the energy in terms of atomic/molecular movement ie are absolute temp and kinetic energy of atoms'molecules directly proportional to each other?)

Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2012 1:36 pm
by Vraith
Heh...you have like 50 questions in there!
Heat isn't really a force/energy itself, though, as much as a ruler [or a thermometer if you will...or even if you won't :lol: ] What we call "heat" is always sourced in one of the other actual forces [There is no Hot's Boson to give us Playboy Bunnies, or even Ms. Universe....though strangely there ARE beauty and charm]
Which is my hopefully amusing way of saying several things...the on topic one being that the heat/temp/kelvin thing is old school thermodynamics...I'm not sure how, or even IF, it applies to quantum in any ordinary/sensible way, though I'm tempted to search "quantum heat/temp" to find out.
Movement may be a "fundamental form of energy" if, by "form" you mean "one of the things that may happen if energy is present."

Kelvin is a measure as you suggest...every degree is the same size/energy gain/loss. So, BTW is Celsius...in fact the only difference between the two is to subtract 270something from kelvin to get celsius.
And there is a similar for Fahrenheit [since I'm sure this will fascinate you...it's almost totally useless, because I'm not sure anyone uses it for anything at all thus fascinates me... ;) ] called Rankines? [Fahrenheit minus 450something? equals Rankine]
EDITED to add: Ok, I think I hit all the slow pitches, someone smart can bat clean up and smack the hard ones out of the park

Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2012 1:36 pm
by Zarathustra
Honestly, I think what you're getting at is more metaphysical questions than scientific. If "the capacity to do work" isn't good enough (work defined as "force acting over a distance"), I'm not sure what would satisfy you. What's force? What's distance? What's space?

We could say that energy is something like "unfrozen" or "fluid" matter, since matter can be converted into energy by Einstein's equation. But then what is matter? Well, it's atoms. What are atoms? Protons/electrons/neutrons. What are those? Well, quarks. And so on.

I think that when you get down to the "bottom" of everything, reality is nothing more than relations. Our science codifies these relations in terms of numerical patterns. Our perceptions experience some of these patterns as distinct impressions, "fleshing them out." But those perceptions are in some sense illusions. The impression of red isn't in light. Light just happens to have lots of different frequencies, and our brain translates a certain frequency as the experience of the color red. Ditto with mass and momentum. We have impressions of solidity and weight. But these aren't really in matter, either. That's not to say that the relations we're detecting with our perceptions aren't real, but it's just our human way of detecting them.

In the end, I think it's all math. Order. Relations. Patterns. And strange loops within that math (i.e. consciousness) can detect themselves and everything else. There may not be any other "medium" to convey or transmit or substantiate those patterns besides existence itself.

What is existence?

Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2012 2:23 pm
by Hashi Lebwohl
I think you are on to something by calling heat--which, as you correctly state, is merely how we experience the vibrating kinetic energy of molecules--the "fundamental" form of energy. We know from quantum mechanics that matter at or lower than the molecular level has a wave-like nature; we also know from other experiments that cooling matter to below 4 K cause the wave properties of matter become predominant. I think that the vibrational energy we exprience as heat is matter trying to act as a wave.

From a physics point of view, though, if we have to define energy then I suppose the following two related definitions suffice:
energy is matter in non-particle form
matter is energy in non-wave form


Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2012 10:44 pm
by Fist and Faith
Zarathustra wrote:Honestly, I think what you're getting at is more metaphysical questions than scientific. If "the capacity to do work" isn't good enough (work defined as "force acting over a distance"), I'm not sure what would satisfy you. What's force? What's distance? What's space?

We could say that energy is something like "unfrozen" or "fluid" matter, since matter can be converted into energy by Einstein's equation. But then what is matter? Well, it's atoms. What are atoms? Protons/electrons/neutrons. What are those? Well, quarks. And so on.
You're probably right. I have the same question as peter, and I'm not sure there's an answer. What changes frozen matter to unfrozen, or vice-versa? Or, as Hashi put it, what changes energy from matter in non-particle form to matter that is energy in non-wave form? What makes electrons and protrons attract each other? What, exactly, is the strong nuclear force? Not tiny hooks? An energy? Made of what? What is energy?

Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2012 11:11 pm
by Hashi Lebwohl
Experimentally, scientists can change molecules from having more particle-like properties to having more wave-like properties by simply lowering the temperature; below a critical threshold a molecule changes from a localized particle to a "standing wave" in a volume. The lower the temperature gets, the greater the volume of space this standing wave occupies. At low enough temperatures, the standing wave pattern of molecule A intersects the standing wave pattern of molecule B and then you get really strange things happening because now molecules A and B are not distinguished from each other--they both occupy a certain volume of space at the same time and are non-localized!

This is just the quantum version of a change of state, like going from water to ice. In this case, though, we get to observe a fifth state of matter; I think they still call it a superfluid (especially when working with helium as they usually do). It is a zero-viscosity liquid and doesn't cling to or adhere to other matter--it even defies gravity and flows up the sides of the container in which it is stored. Check out the wikipedia article on superfluid helium-4 for more info.

I don't think physics is capable of answering the question "what *is* energy?", at least not when asked like that. Fist and Faith mentions the strong force. Physicists know that it exists, it can be measured, and they are fairly certain they know how it works, keeping the nucleus from disintegrating due to electromagnetic repulsion...but they don't know what it "is".

Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2012 8:21 am
by peter
Thanks guys. The answers are all interesting and I can't contribute much back because the whole thing seems - how shall I say - much 'looser' than I imagined. In respect of energy the one thing I think I did get is perhaps best summed up by Hashi's tag line - no matter how thin you slice it it's still bologna! :)

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 4:59 am
by Avatar
The universe is a lot looser than it appears. :D

--A

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 5:41 am
by sgt.null
peter :

Given the test scores of two random samples of men and women,
does one group differ from the other? A possible null hypothesis
is that the mean male score is the same as the mean female score:
H0: μ1 = μ2


where:
H0 = the null hypothesis μ1 = the mean of population 1, and μ2 = the mean of population 2.


A stronger null hypothesis is that the two samples
are drawn from the same population, such that the
variance and shape of the distributions are also equal.


hope that helps. :biggrin:

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 9:31 am
by peter
You plucked the words almost straight fom my mouth Sarge. How do you do that? :lol:

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 10:59 am
by sgt.null
it is a gift, just like knowing you were thinking this when you woke up this very morning...

Gilbreath observed a pattern while playing with the ordered sequence of prime numbers
2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, ...
Computing the absolute value of the difference between term n+1 and term n in this sequence yields the sequence
1, 2, 2, 4, 2, 4, 2, 4, 6, 2, ...
If the same calculation is done for the terms in this new sequence, and the sequence that is the outcome of this process, and again ad infinitum for each sequence that is the output of such a calculation, the first five sequences in this list are given by
1, 0, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 4, ... 1, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 2, ... 1, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 2, ... 1, 2, 0, 0, 0, 2, ... 1, 2, 0, 0, 2, ...
What Gilbreath—and François Proth before him—noticed is that the first term in each series of differences appears to be 1.


would you supply us with the answer?

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 12:25 pm
by peter
Opinion is divided as to the best approach to take when attempting a detailed exegesis on this question, but I am reliably informed (by scources that I must take on trust to be reputable and to have no 'hidden agenda') that the answer is indeed............ 42.

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 12:32 pm
by Vraith
peter wrote:Opinion is divided as to the best approach to take when attempting a detailed exegesis on this question, but I am reliably informed (by scources that I must take on trust to be reputable and to have no 'hidden agenda') that the answer is indeed............ 42.
And...ummm....I'm sorry,
what was the question to the answer?

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 5:23 am
by sgt.null
peter wrote:Opinion is divided as to the best approach to take when attempting a detailed exegesis on this question, but I am reliably informed (by scources that I must take on trust to be reputable and to have no 'hidden agenda') that the answer is indeed............ 42.
wrong! error in your input!

better luck next time.

we have some Turtle Wax as a parting gift for all our contestants...

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 2:56 pm
by peter
Just checking my scources and find that - yes - 42 is indeed the answer to the "ultimate question of life, the universe and everything" (my italics) :crazy:

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 3:34 pm
by Obi-Wan Nihilo
That's a good mention Hashi, I was going to bring that up. A torus of supercooled helium functions as a quantum particle. If you rotate the vessel carefully at first the helium remains stationary until you get to a certain point and then it all begins moving at once. Kind of eerie, but it also suggests that the quantum states of individual particles treated statistically are what gives rise to a lot of our experience of mass and velocity.

Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 4:59 am
by Avatar
:LOLS:

Statistics. :D

--A

Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 2:53 pm
by peter
Ron Burgunihilo wrote:That's a good mention Hashi, I was going to bring that up. A torus of supercooled helium functions as a quantum particle. If you rotate the vessel carefully at first the helium remains stationary until you get to a certain point and then it all begins moving at once. Kind of eerie, but it also suggests that the quantum states of individual particles treated statistically are what gives rise to a lot of our experience of mass and velocity.
This is jogging something in my memory that I saw done on tv or somewhere - but definitely not with supercooled helium or anything like that. In fact I'm sure it was just ordinary water or something in a bucket and they were using it to demonstrate some weird property about how/why the bucket rotates but the contents don't or asking how does the water 'know' to start rotating or somesuch question. (pretty vague stuff eh guys ;) ).

Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 7:00 am
by sgt.null
What is the measurement of What is the measurement of the outside of a water bottle the outside of a water bottle?

If the legal limit in Indiana is point 08 percent can you drive legally if you are point 07 percent or under and not have to worry about a night in jail or ticket or worse?

Where the number of things counted would be more than six digit numbers?

What happens when you add 0 to a number?

How big is a million?

What is a part of a term in math?

How do you find the missing angle?

How much does it cost to mail a letter that weights 2.2 ounces?

How do you perform zero-extend?

What is the length and width of an apple?

How do you find parallel perpendicular or neither?

Do you count inside the triangle for area?

Is there any graph that will represent the jealous husband problem?

What letter has to do with measurement?

What Appeared on may 25 1531?

What is half a pair?

Formula a fort and calculate the length of spiral?

What is the formula for functions?

I am a number! if you round the number of days in october to the nearest ten and round the number of days in February to the nearest ten i am half of the product of those two numbers what am i?

Is sample used more than population?

What the meaning of pi?

The states that the angle of incidence equals the angle of reflection?

What is the difference between cartia 240 mg and tiazem 240 mg?

Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2012 5:27 am
by Avatar
Null...

--A