this post was submitted on 08 Mar 2025
12 points (62.0% liked)

Ask Science

9538 readers
58 users here now

Ask a science question, get a science answer.


Community Rules


Rule 1: Be respectful and inclusive.Treat others with respect, and maintain a positive atmosphere.


Rule 2: No harassment, hate speech, bigotry, or trolling.Avoid any form of harassment, hate speech, bigotry, or offensive behavior.


Rule 3: Engage in constructive discussions.Contribute to meaningful and constructive discussions that enhance scientific understanding.


Rule 4: No AI-generated answers.Strictly prohibit the use of AI-generated answers. Providing answers generated by AI systems is not allowed and may result in a ban.


Rule 5: Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.Adhere to community guidelines and comply with instructions given by moderators.


Rule 6: Use appropriate language and tone.Communicate using suitable language and maintain a professional and respectful tone.


Rule 7: Report violations.Report any violations of the community rules to the moderators for appropriate action.


Rule 8: Foster a continuous learning environment.Encourage a continuous learning environment where members can share knowledge and engage in scientific discussions.


Rule 9: Source required for answers.Provide credible sources for answers. Failure to include a source may result in the removal of the answer to ensure information reliability.


By adhering to these rules, we create a welcoming and informative environment where science-related questions receive accurate and credible answers. Thank you for your cooperation in making the Ask Science community a valuable resource for scientific knowledge.

We retain the discretion to modify the rules as we deem necessary.


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Energy in physics feels analogous to money in economics. Is a manmade medium of exchange used for convenience. It is the exchange medium between measureable physical states/things.

Is energy is real in the same way money is? An incredibly useful accounting trick that is used so frequently it feels fundamental, but really it's just a mathmatical convenience?

Small aside: From this perspective 'conservatipn of energy' is a redundant statement. Of course energy must be conserved or else the equations are wrong. The definition of energy is it's conservation.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

People have died from energy. So, no.

You could die from nuclear radiation, micro waves, electricity, heat. These are all energy.

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

All those things have energy, but they aren't energy. For example, with microwaves the energy is proportional to the wavelength. Nuclear radiation comes in 4 forms, three of them are fast moving particles, one of them is photons. Energy allows us to say this light wave with a specific wavelength has the same amount of energy as this beta emission electron with a specific speed, mass, and charge.

People died from the interaction small wavelength photons imparting momentum on the atoms on their body, or fast moving particles colliding with the atoms in their body.

If someone fell off a building and died I don't think anyone would say 'energy did that'. The person died as a result of transferring a lot of kinetic energy to the ground though.