Work Done and the law of conservation of energy

Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 10:59 PM

The last stoke break a camel’s break, finally I have to wage a battle against some of existing concept of Physics.
This time what I consider problematic is the concept of work done. There is website proclaim proudly since work done only exist when a force has move distance, therefore a Magnet clinging on the wall of a refrigerator has done no work, and it should be calculated this way. This bookworm seems to forget the subtle and critical difference between useful work done and work done.
Work done is often consider directly related to the amount of energy spent. So no useful work done means no energy has spent to done useful work, but no work done meant that no energy has been spent! The author has obviously never tried mountain climbing, nor he understood the concept of potential energy. If no energy has spent, then why do we need to spent energy to hold an object in a height h? If no energy has spent, then why would metal would decay under heavy weight? Why do we need to repair roads? Since it has never exert any energy on the vehicle running on the top! We could have exhaust all oil reserve in holding an object in a fixed height, yet no Physicist recognize any work has been done. If we accept this notion, then we should prepare to accept the contradiction of law of conservation of energy, we found a way to destroy energy!
According to the law of conservation of energy, energy can not be created nor destroyed, it could only be transfer to other form. It also implied that we know the source and form of energy it has become. Now since energy has spent for accomplishing nothing (in accordance of classical Physics): No work done, nor we could identify in what form does this energy become? Although every layperson understood that energy is spent to counteract gravitational attraction force, but like Physicist in the world has claim, this energy just gone to netherland. It is not the case where we found it difficult to identify the source and form of energy has become, it is the case , which by definition of textbook Physics, the expenditure of energy has theoretically become nothing—because the framework of Physics from Age of steaming machine is unable to deal with the situation involving Fields. This is the case where Energy that could be destroyed through an naturalistic process. Thus law of conservation of energy is violated within the strict framework if we are going accepting this definition of work done. We thus able to derive a contradiction with this theoretical framework.
As the basic of all theory require completeness and internal coherence, any theory failed the last requirement would at least deserve total abandoning or major revision. I therefore ask the Physicist community seriously consider my proposal to review the existing framework of Physics.

發表迴響

在下方填入你的資料或按右方圖示以社群網站登入:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / 變更 )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / 變更 )

Facebook照片

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / 變更 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / 變更 )

連結到 %s

%d 位部落客按了讚: