The Defenition of "Energy"

[beavis]

Everything is energy. Any kind of energy can be converted to any other kind.

[yombalula]

Not easily.

The Universe bagan extremely hot and has been cooling ever since. in the first microseconds matter and energy were at equilibrium, That is that matter and energy were constantly transforming into each other. When the universe cooled this free interchanges stopped. Matter can be considered frozen energy.

IF you think of ICE it takes energy to melt it. Given a universe which  is very cold (3 deg Kelvin) it is very stable. Same goes for Matter.

Therefore matter is not EASILY converted to energy any more because only some reactions are possible givine the relatively low temperature even in the core of stars.

the first law of Thermodynamics says that Energy can be converted from one form to another. However, any transformation of energy that you make involves losses that get radiated away as useless heat. The lowest possible temperature is absolute 0 kelvin, which is nearly impossible to reach (we have gotten to microkelvins).

Thus the 3 LAWS of thermo are:

1. You can't Win ( enegy is not created --cahnges to Mas-energy by Einstein)

2. You can't break even, No process is 100% efficient. This makes free energy machines impossible. Don't even try.

3. You can't get out of the game - Impossible to get to absolute 0.

[beavis]

To say that everything is energy, ease of conversion between types of energy is not required.

Negative energy has been proven to exist, between 2 extremely close plates of metal. 0 kelvin is 0 energy. Why cant you get negative kelvin with negative energy?

What exactly is temperature at an atomic size? What does a hot atom look like compared to a cold atom?

[Adkha]

quote:Originally posted by beavis

To say that everything is energy, ease of conversion between types of energy is not required.

Negative energy has been proven to exist, between 2 extremely close plates of metal. 0 kelvin is 0 energy. Why cant you get negative kelvin with negative energy?

What exactly is temperature at an atomic size? What does a hot atom look like compared to a cold atom?

The hot one is vibrating and the other is not or less...[] common basic physics[]

[kiauma]

I posted this in another topic, and thought it would be relavent transplanted and adopted here.

Many define energy as 'potential power', or 'power for potential work'. They go to lengths to 'collect' this energy, then throw it to some desired purpose.

The fact is, however, that energy isn't a noun, it is a verb. That energy is some 'thing' is an error of semantics and for the convenience of mental manipulation. We are far too grounded in Aristotlean logic which says a thing is itself, and not anything else - another human invention.

Energy is the translation of something from one state to another. Physically, from water to steam, or from disease to health. That we can quantize this translation in numbers does not measure 'energy' as a thing in itself, it is a measure of change or potential change - work - which we conceptualize as 'energy'.

Psychologically, energy can be thought of as the change from indifference to affection, or from confusion to clarity, or conceptualize it as the impetus enabling action. We cannot put numbers on that, but measure our success by the magnitude of it's compliance with our will - and carry over the illusion that it is some 'thing' causeing it to happen, but it is always a translation, from one force to another.

To speak of the 'energy' of an atom is misleading.  Then, what is really being referred to is temperature, which can be mathematically translated to 'work' but really is just heat.  The heat of an atom is the measure of the energy band that the atom is vibrating at.  

In standard atomic theory, as an atom heats up, it's electrons jump to higher and higher orbits.  These orbits are not continuously variable, but jump in discrete quanta - from which the word 'Quantum' derives.  For an explanation of this, go here;  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck's_constant

[JoWo]

Energy is the capability to perform work.  That is its definition.  You cannot see energy itself, only its effects.

[volcomstone]

quote:You cannot see energy itself, only its effects

What? can't you see light? your retina registers photons, Photons=energy

[beavis]

kiauma, Energy is a particle/wave just like everything else. It can be converted to mass, which is a thing, so how is energy not a thing? Photons are things, not a transition. What is a photon in the middle of space transititioning?

[kiauma]

Good question Beavis.  BTW, was really impressed with your telekinesis video.  []

Again from that other topic:

Because energy is the change of something from one state to another, it is potential form. Thus, all matter (form) is potentially energy, and all energy, potential form.

Something that causes a lot of confusion is that there are six basic physical types of energy described:

Kinetic Energy
Potential Energy
Thermal (Heat) Energy
Chemical Energy
Electromagnetic Radiation (Light)
Nuclear Energy  

Also, we could add Spirit energy, which I think is an extension of Light.  Now, I'm not going to pretend to understand in a lot of depth, I am no physicist, but here is how I understand it.

Most 'energy' breaks down to kinetic energy.  Kinetic energy is the energy an object possesses by virtue of its motion.   Potential energy, like kinetic energy, is also a measure of the work an object or system can exert on another object or system.  Thermal energy (heat) is the motion of the atoms caused by the 'energy' band the atom is vibrating at.  Chemical energy is usually expressed as some form of heat manipulation.   Light is kinetic energy with zero mass.   Nuclear energy is the familiar E-MC2 transformation of matter to heat energy.

The formula for kinetic energy is:

Ekinetic = (1/2) m v2

Where Ekinetic = energy, m = mass, and v = velocity.   Intuitively, you can think of kinetic energy as a measure of the work (or damage!) that something can do if it collides with something else; the larger the speed and/or the larger the mass, the larger the kinetic energy, and thus the greater the impact.

Now, to make my point, imagine that there is particle 'm' alone in the universe.  

Imagine it is going a high rate of speed.  The question is - How do you know how fast it is going?  If it is the only particle in the universe, Relativity tells us it is not moving, because there is nothing to measure it's speed against relative to itself.  Without something to measure relative to, it cannot be thought of as moving at all.

Now imagine that there are two particles in the universe.  Imagine that one is moving relative to the other.   Now the question becomes - How do you know which one is moving relative to the other?   The answer is arbitrary, because no matter what they do they will appear to be moving the same speed relative to each other.  Mathematically, you could relegate either one as moving with the other one stationary, and it will give the same answer of kinetic energy each time.   no matter which you say is moving, or how you divide up the velocity relative to each other, they will still have the same destructive force if they hit each other, because of their motion relative to each other.

When they collide, the two particles velocities will interact with each other, attempting to change the direction of the other.  If this force is greater than the structural force of the particles, they will overcome it and they will be destroyed.  If not, the motion of each will be translated to the other, and in their new vector they will go.  What their new state of kinetic motion will be is entirely dependent on the 'kinetic energy' as expressed in the formula.

You could say an asteroid hit the earth.  However it is just as true that the earth rushed upon an asteroid - the perspective is entirely arbitrary.  In either case, the results are just as disastrous.

But which one had the 'energy'?  As I pointed out, either one could be assumed to be the one with all the velocity, and it makes no difference to the outcome.  Also, without something moving fast relative to it, you couldn't say it had any 'energy' at all.  That is why saying something has 'energy' is absurd.  The only 'energy' is in the interaction, in the observed change of state when they interact.   The mathematical formulation is true, but describes what happens when it interacts, and what a potential interaction would be with something moving relative to it, and is otherwise meaningless.

That is why I say energy is only a change of state.  The formula of kinetic energy describes this change of state, by quantizing an objects velocity relative to something else.

That is how I understand kinetic energy.  Now to your question Beavis...

After thinking on your question, and doing a little research, I found that light is basically described with the same formula as kinetic energy, but with zero mass.   Now you can take this any way you want, but my scenario above still holds, that without relative motion, it still cannot be said to have energy.  The thing about light though, is that it ALWAYS has a relative motion to an observer of 186,000 Miles a second.

So yes, light is a pure energy state.  []  Thank you for leading me to research this more fully Beavis.

Question:  If there is no observer, does light still travel 186,000 miles a second?  Is this actually an interaction on a common mental plane, rather than the physical plane of simple matter?

[JoWo]

Excellent point, volkomstone, yet one could argue that light is only a specific form of energy and not the basic category of energy itself.

[Adkha]

quote:Originally posted by volcomstone

quote:You cannot see energy itself, only its effects

What? can't you see light? your retina registers photons, Photons=energy

Hmm good point...but....isn't light also the effect of the energy of the photon? Isn't it the vibration we see instead of the energy?
Bcause we cant see other frequency vibrations like infra red light en ultra violet light.

Probably we only see 1 % of the whole universe....just because our senses won't let us see the other frequencies, and I'm only talking about lightfrequenties, but also sound, "sound"...and "mass-freqeuncies"

[Adkha]

HUh....Kiauma...you are argueing yourself now aren't you?
First you say energy is nothing, it is only a translation for the change of one thing into another....
But hen you'r saying...ok light is pure energy....

(this is a great topic :d)

[volcomstone]

quote:Isn't it the vibration we see instead of the energy?
Bcause we cant see other frequency vibrations like infra red light en ultra violet light.

thats true, but thats only because the cells in your retina (rod and cone) can only register photons of a specific band of wavelengths, what is known as the visual spectrum, the vibrational frequency of other wavelengths cannot stimulate a change in the cells, thereby sending a signal to the visual cortex via the optic nerve

But a photon is very much energy, because of the particle/wave duality of all matter/energy, light can aalso be described as a wave,


however your question goes beyond that sort of,  when it comes down to it all, theres an argument out there that we don't really "see" anything its just the interpretation we see,

however people who can obe claim the world is very much the same as your physical eye would see it,


- but why do you even need your eyes to see? what if the energy directly affected your visual cortex, completely bypassing the eyes?  
this Is how we can see energys not of visual wavelengths, or not even proven by science etc.

[Adkha]

quote:Originally posted by volcomstone

quote:Isn't it the vibration we see instead of the energy?
Bcause we cant see other frequency vibrations like infra red light en ultra violet light.

thats true, but thats only because the cells in your retina (rod and cone) can only register photons of a specific band of wavelengths, what is known as the visual spectrum, the vibrational frequency of other wavelengths cannot stimulate a change in the cells, thereby sending a signal to the visual cortex via the optic nerve

But a photon is very much energy, because of the particle/wave duality of all matter/energy, light can aalso be described as a wave,


however your question goes beyond that sort of,  when it comes down to it all, theres an argument out there that we don't really "see" anything its just the interpretation we see,

however people who can obe claim the world is very much the same as your physical eye would see it,


- but why do you even need your eyes to see? what if the energy directly affected your visual cortex, completely bypassing the eyes?  
this Is how we can see energys not of visual wavelengths, or not even proven by science etc.

So here you are "proving" yourself wrong...(?)...light is the effect of the energy called a photon.

[JoWo]

I don't think that light is the effect of the energy called photon.  Yes, our eyes' sensation of light is an effect of the photons/radiation hitting them, but this does not necessarily mean that light energy itself is an effect of photons.  Photons and electro-magnetic radiation are physical phenomena and I doubt that they exist on the astral plane as such, although light exists there too.  

I believe that photons/radiation are light and vice versa, only expressed in different terms, without there being a cause-and-effect relationship.  To see this, it helps to understand quantum metaphysics.  You may not be inclined to read www.quantum-metaphysics.com or my book, Understanding the Grand Design: Spiritual Reality's Inner Logic.  So, I'll try a shortcut here for this particular case.

Everything in the universe is organized in parts and their wholes.  The cells in your body are parts of organs and they are in turn parts of the larger whole of your body.  Your body and your mind are parts of your higher Self.  One step higher, your reincarnational Selves are parts of your soul, and higher yet, many souls are parts of humankind.  Continuing up the ladder, humankind together with all other species are parts of the whole of all living beings, and so on until we can say that all aspects and phenomena of the entire universe are parts of a transcendent unified Whole that I call "All-Entity".  Religions identify All-Entity with names such as God or Nirvana.

Since All-Entity unifies everything that exists into one entity, It is also the seat of all existing energy.  In other words, All-Entity is the prime source of all forms of energy (as of everything else).  So, Adkha, if you want to see the basis of energy, you'll have to see "God".  This is what we call "spiritual awakening".

Coming back to the specific energy form of light, it is now easy to see how it fits into the overall picture.  As indicated before, everything in the universe is subdivided into parts, so is energy.  One part of energy is electro-magnetic radiation, and light is one sub-part of that.  Photons and radiation are parts of light as it impinges on our physical plane.  This is how light shows up in our environment.  If you want to, you could perhaps say that the energy of light "causes" the appearance of photons and radiation in the physical plane, but I wouldn't say so, because quantum-metaphysics tells us that the whole and its parts are one and the same, only seen from different perspectives.  But explaining this would really go beyond the scope of this post here [].

[Adkha]

He Yowo...

yeah maybe we go a little bit off topic here...but actually I do not really care see what the modurators do...

Ehmm...so quantum-metaphysics tells us that a part of a whole is the same as the whole and vice versa? So the little cirkel in the big cirkel is the same as the big cirkel en vice versa. Now you call the big cirkel the all-entigy..or god. Then there are some new questions that comes up in my mind.
So I can say I am god, same way I can say that I am you?
There is some level I can comprehend with that, because I believe we are all one energy field (the total all-entity)
But is energy everything? Isn't there more then energy. Is really everything energy?

Cause if everything is energy and thus everything is the same energy. That means you am I, I am you, We are...and so on.

Does this quantum-metaphysics also includes the higher planes? Or just this physical one.

[JoWo]

You misunderstood, Adkha, I said the whole and its parts (plural) are the same, only seen from different points of view.  I also said that talking about this would go beyond the scope of my post.  Whether you see either the whole or only its parts depends on whether your consciousness is tuned into the higher dimensions of the whole or the lower dimensions of its parts.  For instance, with our 3-dimensional vision, we perceive people as separate entities (parts). However, a fully Awakened individual is not limited to three dimensions and can perceive how we are all one with each other and with God.  Such individual views the same reality as we but perceives it as whole and can indeed say "I am God", God is me", "you are me", and "I am you".

Concerning your question about energy, I did not say that energy is everything.  What I am saying is that All-Entity/God is the Whole of everything and at God's level nothing is separated from each other.  At this level, everything is united into one single, undifferentiated whole, including energy, love, life, liberty, joy, - you name it.  However, from our point of view, with our limited consciousness, we can think only of one of God's aspects at a time.  So we say, for instance, that God is the prime source of energy, or of love, etc.  All these "parts" are actually one and the same in the highest Whole of the universe.

Quantum-metaphysics uses results of modern physics and observes different dimensions in our environment to formulate a "Holistic Logic."  The logic explains how all planes of reality are interrelated, including the highest, All-Entity/God.  This results "automatically" in a confirmation of basic concepts in world religions.

[Adkha]

Okay thank u....I see what your saying. I think it's time i continue your story about the meta-pshysics. I started it after hours of reading my eyes got tired I think I print the rest down and read it.

Thank you...

Best regards

[JoWo]

You're welcome, Adkha.  Let me know when you have more questions.

Jo.

[kiauma]

I have been thinking of this for some time, and I have reformulated my thoughts on this.  See what you think.

The question has been posed why the word 'energy' is applied to 'spirit' and other metaphysical phenomena.  The answer is one of convenience and practicality.

To answer this in more detail, let's take a good look at just what we are talking about when we talk about physical energy.

In physics, there are 6 kinds of energy identified.  They are:

Kinetic Energy
Potential Energy
Thermal (Heat) Energy
Chemical Energy
Electromagnetic Radiation (Light)
Nuclear Energy

No matter which type of energy you want to talk about, each of these are described in terms of transformative power.  What this means is that each particular type of energy is mathematically quantified in terms of potential work, usually espressed in joules.

A Joule is equivalent to 1 watt for 1 second (heat), or the force of 1 newton for 1 meter (kinetic).

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy:

From the perspective of physics, every physical system contains (alternatively, stores) a quantity called energy; exactly how much is determined by taking the sum of a number of special-purpose equations, each designed to quantify energy stored in a particular way. In general, the presence of energy is detected by an observer any time there is a change in the properties of an object or system. There is no uniform way to visualize energy; it is best regarded as an abstract quantity useful in making predictions. In fact, many recognized forms of energy stored in such an object or system, are not easily detectibe by the average observer.

The first sort of prediction energy allows one to make is how much work a physical system could be made to do. Performing work requires energy, and thus the amount of energy in a system limits the maximum amount of work that a system could conceivably perform. In the one-dimensional case of applying a force through a distance, the energy required is (integral) f(x) dx, where f(x) gives the amount of force being applied as a function of the distance moved.

Note, however, that not all energy in a system is stored in a recoverable form; thus, in practice, the amount of energy in a system available for performing work may be much less than the total amount of energy in the system.

In other words, physical energy is detected and quantized according to observations of change within a system.  THAT is exactly why it is convenient to use the word energy in describing consciousness, spirit, and other metaphysical phenomena.  No, it is not a physical energy, it is a metaphysical energy, with the effects of change observable in much the same way that the word 'energy' is used in defining physical phenomena.  

The only thing lacking is a comprehensive mathematical description, though one would expect that in a metaphysical system.  Instead, the detection of metaphysical energy is accomplished through the experience and feeling of emotions and awareness in general.   When describing how emotions and awareness interacts, such as in the development of chakras or in telepathic communication, it is very convenient to use the term 'energy' in defining the influences and changes that are experienced, and as a mental abstraction in influencing or manipulating those forces.

So, using the word 'energy' to describe a soul is perfectly legitimate and even useful, as a source of change upon the world.  Exactly what it is is unknowable in the physical world.  To ask what the soul is, is like asking the question, 'how might one imagine the unimaginable?'  The answer would be meaningless in the physical world, because it does not exist in the physical world, but to describe it as energy is very useful and meaningful.

[LogoRat]

Energy is the source of all things you can observe.
without it, you would not see anything called mass.
Mass is only energy slowed down.

[GottaGetLow]

Everything is made of energy.. everything that is made has an energy amount and can rejuve energy accordingly

[Leon]

How would I define energy?...

Energy is the very life that sustains our being. It eminates from us, allows us to grow(mentally and physically) and is under any believers control.

How do I define energy?...

The truth is there really is no absolute meaning of energy. To most it is still a controversal theory. Energy is the power that gives and takes lives. It is the power that allows astral projection or ethereal travel. It flows through us and over 300 chakras that connects the system of Qi, Chi, or Aura. Whatever you like to call it.

Energy is a 6 letter word. [8D] And that's the truth... Or is it?

[beavis]

(Mass / Energy)^2 + (Distance / Time)^2 = 1

That is the form of E = M C2 that I prefer. Its easier to understand. There are no units like seconds, meters, newtons, kilograms, etc. Everything is just a number.


Something confusing about a mass-energy particle (that is what everything is). I'm not sure about this, but I've never heard of a photon having mass. But it should gain some if you move faster.

Maybe its just an angular change in the quantum wave function of the mass-energy particle. Most quantum physicists say that means it is more or less likely to appear at some point in the wave. But I think its because they dont have a good theory of dimensions. They dont know what superpositioned means, except that it could be in some parallel universe or a few at the same time.

Regardless of that, energy appears to be a dimension perpendicular to time.

[Adkha]

Everybody talks about this word energy...like everyone understand what is really is. How can you define it?
Mass is equivalent to energy....mass I understand....you can see it, feel it, smell it. But with energy...u can't. U can sense the physical effects of energy...but the energy itself?

Does the whole concept energy even excist? Or is it just a word given to something that have caused a certain effect that we sense.