Energy doesn't exist

[k9b4]

Sorry if this is obvious to you, I have run into a lot of people online and IRL who think that energy is a thing which exists and is transferred between other things which exist.

Energy is only a concept, unlike an electron, which is not a concept, it is a real thing which exists in reality and affects other things in reality.

Energy is not a real thing, it does not have any effect on things which are real, obviously, because it doesn't exist.

Energy is defined as the ability to do work. We say that an electron 'has the ability to do work', and thus 'has energy', but this is a concept only. The electron does not possess anything physically, it possesses 'energy' only inside our minds.

You might argue that an electron is also only a concept. But this is incorrect. The word 'electron' is a concept which refers to something which is real. The word 'energy' is a concept which refers to something which is not real - the word 'energy' is a concept which refers to another concept.

 

[Belak]

Then how to you explain heat, or lack thereof?

Don't get me wrong, I'm interested in your logic.

But isn't energy like wind, you can't see it or draw a picture of it, you can only make an inference that it is there based on the things it affects.

Energy affects people and things, and so we named it, we may not understand it fully, but I think it is definitely there.

 

[k9b4]

Then how to you explain heat, or lack thereof?

Don't get me wrong, I'm interested in your logic.

Heat is average kinetic energy of particles.

The particles in a hotter thing move around faster than the particles in a colder thing.

We have sensors on our body which detect how fast the particles in an object are moving. This is heat.

But isn't energy like wind, you can't see it or draw a picture of it, you can only make an inference that it is there based on the things it affects.

No. Wind is the movement of air particles. You can draw pictures of the particles which make up air.

Electromagnetic field exists, and affects things which are real, and you cannot draw a picture of electromagnetic field.

Perhaps you think that EM field = energy? This is incorrect, EM field 'has energy', but they are two different concepts.

Energy affects people and things, and so we named it, we may not understand it fully, but I think it is definitely there.

Energy has no effect on anything. Electrons repel other electrons. We say that energy is being transferred between the electrons, but really nothing is being transferred.

Force is another concept which does not exist. When I kick a ball we say I applied a 'force' to the ball. No such physical thing called 'force' was applied to the ball. The electrons in my foot repelled the electrons in the ball.

 

[Belak]

Heat is average kinetic energy of particles.

The particles in a hotter thing move around faster than the particles in a colder thing.

We have sensors on our body which detect how fast the particles in an object are moving. This is heat.

You used energy in your argument.

How do they move? What sets them going?

 

[Belak]

So... Are you supporting energy or are you not, it seems like you keep saying objects have energy?

Please clarify what you mean, is it a thing or is it not.

And technically you can't really prove anything exists...

 

[k9b4]

You used energy in your argument.

Yeah I know, sorry. The way I used the word was correct, though.

I'm not saying that the word energy is useless and meaningless. It's a fine word which means something, it is just not a 'thing' which exists.

Heat is simply how fast the particles in an object are moving around.

If the particles in object 1 are moving faster than the particles in object 2, object 1 is hotter than object 2.

Energy doesn't exist the same way that a collision doesn't exist. A collision is not a thing. A collision is when two things which exist touch each other.

Energy doesn't exist the same way that love doesn't exist. Love is a complex series of chemical and electrical processes which occur in the brain. The chemicals and ions which move along nerves exist, but 'love' is only a concept.

How do they move? What sets them going?

Well, I guess they first started moving at the time of the big bang, and they are still moving today.

 

[ProxyAmenRa]

Energy is the capacity to do work. Thus we know indirectly that it exists.

 

[k9b4]

Energy is the capacity to do work. Thus we know indirectly that it exists.

Depends on your definition of exists. If exists = has an effect on reality, then energy does not exist.

Energy = the capacity to do work

Exists = has an effect on reality

The capacity to do work is not a thing which has an effect on reality. The capacity to do work is a property of things which exist.

 

[Analyzer]

Depends on your definition of exists. If exists = has an effect on reality, then energy does not exist.

Energy = the capacity to do work

Exists = has an effect on reality

The capacity to do work is not a thing which has an effect on reality. The capacity to do work is a property of things which exist.

This is like saying concepts don't exist, only objects. Which I guess could be true depending on your definition of existence.

Energy is a concept, a forest is a concept, society is a concept, Trees exist, individuals exist, electromagnetics exist.

 

[ProxyAmenRa]

Depends on your definition of exists. If exists = has an effect on reality, then energy does not exist.

Energy = the capacity to do work

Exists = has an effect on reality

The capacity to do work is not a thing which has an effect on reality. The capacity to do work is a property of things which exist.

Well, yes, energy does have an effect on reality. The transference of energy alters objects.

I have a 5 kilogram object 1 meter off the ground, its potential energy is equal to mass*gravity*height. Thus if I drop the object, at the point at which it reaches the ground it would have gained 49.05 Joules in the form of kinetic energy.

Let's figure out the velocity of the object just before it hits the ground:

s - distance (m)
v - velocity (m/s)
t - time (second)
a - acceleration or gravity (m/(s^2))
m - mass (kg)
h - height
KE - Kinetic energy
PE - Potential energy

s = v*t+(1/2)*a*t^2, where v = 0

t = sqrt(2*s/a) = sqrt(2*1/9.81) = 0.4515 sec

v = a*t = 9.81*0.4515 = 4.42 m/sec

Let's see if the potential energy equals the kinetic energy:

KE = (1/2)*m*v^2 = 0.5*5*4.42^2 = 49.05 Joules

PE = m*g*h = 5*9.81*1 = 49.05 Joules

PE = KE

Through the very real concept of energy and knowing its effects on reality we can make these nifty calculations!

 

[k9b4]

Well, yes, energy does have an effect on reality. The transference of energy alters objects.

I have a 5 kilogram object 1 meter off the ground, its potential energy is equal to mass*gravity*height. Thus if I drop the object, at the point at which it reaches the ground it would have gained 49.05 Joules in the form of kinetic energy.

Let's figure out the velocity of the object just before it hits the ground:

s - distance (m)
v - velocity (m/s)
t - time (second)
a - acceleration or gravity (m/(s^2))
m - mass (kg)
h - height
KE - Kinetic energy
PE - Potential energy

s = v*t+(1/2)*a*t^2, where v = 0

t = sqrt(2*s/a) = sqrt(2*1/9.81) = 0.4515 sec

v = a*t = 9.81*0.4515 = 4.42 m/sec

Let's see if the potential energy equals the kinetic energy:

KE = (1/2)*m*v^2 = 0.5*5*4.42^2 = 49.05 Joules

PE = m*g*h = 5*9.81*1 = 49.05 Joules

PE = KE

Through the very real concept of energy and knowing its effects on reality we can make these nifty calculations!

A neat little trick of mathematics, but energy still does not have an effect on reality. My mum does this shit too. She uses retarded formulas to try to explain to me something which is simple and obvious.

Whatever cunts, believe whatever you want.

 

[Cherry Cola]

No you are a retard who thinks that because your senses makes matter appear to you as solid and very much real via tactile sensations, vision, etc that means that's all there is to the world

ie you have a moronic worldview revolving entirely on the percepts of the human species

if you had different senses you would perceive things which we describe as energy as matter dumbass

kindly defenestrate thyself then go work in a coal mine with other plebs until your flesh expires

that your corpse may finally be slung into the depths without ritual

 

[Thurlor]

This seems much like your argument that light doesn't exist.

 

[Teax]

are you now convinced that light/emwaves exist? If so, how do you explain their masslessness, if energy does not exist?

also what's your take on this(link)?

 

[The Introvert]

Let's try this:

E=mc^2

Even with very small mass (real), there is potential to release very large amounts of energy (apparently fake).

I would like to see you explain your idea to the corpses plastered onto walls in Hiroshima 70 years ago. Surely they were not impacted directly by the effects of energy.

 

[Cherry Cola]

He can't touch energy with his hands therefore it doesn't exist, that's his whole argument

 

[Reluctantly]

It exists because it describes how matter affects one another. You have no argument.

 

[Kuu]

that your corpse may finally be slung into the depths without ritual

Ooooh nice one.

 

[ProxyAmenRa]

It is k9b4 vs. the world!!

 

[Brontosaurie]

A neat little trick of mathematics, but energy still does not have an effect on reality. My mum does this shit too. She uses retarded formulas to try to explain to me something which is simple and obvious.

Whatever cunts, believe whatever you want.

ahahahaha sometimes i wish this place had a proper laughing emoticon

you are hilarious

 

[Lot]

These threads are comedy gold.

 

[Cæilon]

I get what you're saying. Energy isn't a physical thing in itself; however, reactions do release energy in the form of physical quantities.

 

[ProxyAmenRa]

I get what you're saying. Energy isn't a physical thing in itself; however, reactions do release energy in the form of physical quantities.

Try to explain to him endothermic reactions.

 

[The Gopher]

(to the tune of bob the builder) Proxy and Cherry working together to get the job done. BROONTI BUILDER Can he prove it BROONTI builder yes he can.

*twitch* "It was at this point that the nurse came into the Gophers ward and sighed, the war of 2031 broke many minds but seeing her father like this was hard to bear"

 

[OrLevitate]

i invest 2 rubles in kb94ski, you're doing god's work.

 

[nanook]

plot twist: k9b4's mom doesn't exist.

 

[Black Rose]

stuff is made of quanta
quanta is information
is information energy?

 

[TheManBeyond]

indeed. Darkness doesn't exists, it is just the absence of your mom

 

[The Grey Man]

indeed. Darkness doesn't exists, it is just the absence of your mom

What's this? A maternal complement, rather than an insult?! I salute you.

 

[Brontosaurie]

This seems much like your argument that light doesn't exist.

yes, and he also writes:

"Energy is only a concept, unlike an electron, which is not a concept, it is a real thing which exists in reality and affects other things in reality."

so stubborn and cute like _something_ that goes like this must be true. feigned concession. smuggled failure. self-convincing, self-foot-legs-dick-torso-throat-mouth-devouring

but how does it work. it all seems backwards. maybe it's the foot kicking itself rather. from within.

 

[scenefinale]

OP doesn't understand E=MC^2

C^2 is a constant
E=M (times some constant)
If you understood this your argument falls apart.


Study up.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/einstein/expe-tyson.html

 

[Grayman]

OP doesn't understand E=MC^2

C^2 is a constant
E=M (times some constant)
If you understood this your argument falls apart.


Study up.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/einstein/expe-tyson.html

Mass and energy are misrepresenting what this equation is actually used for.

Mass is gravity
energy is speed

Mass is still energy and the equation does not include all forms of enrgy.

 

[scenefinale]

Mass and energy are misrepresenting what this equation is actually used for.

Mass is gravity
energy is speed

Mass is still energy and the equation does not include all forms of enrgy.

Not quite.

 

[Grayman]

Not quite.

Good argument.

 

[Reluctantly]

This thread made me realize something.

*I'm hungry*

 

[Cæilon]

This thread made me realize something.

*I'm hungry*

You can't be hungry because hunger doesn't exist.

 

[Reluctantly]

oh yeah, I can't touch it. Sorry.

 

[TheScornedReflex]

None of you exist. Now get the fuck out of my head.

 

[Grayman]

None of you exist. Now get the fuck out of my head.

Im not in your head because you're just a virtual intelligence thinking it is experiencing reality?

 

[ProxyAmenRa]

(to the tune of bob the builder) Proxy and Cherry working together to get the job done. BROONTI BUILDER Can he prove it BROONTI builder yes he can.

There isn't any real animosity between Cherry and I. We are just like ying and yang. Actually we are good friends. ^_^

 

[Hadoblado]

I think it's good that OP is questioning.

 

[Absurdity]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4v0fT90fBog

 

[Cherry Cola]

I think it's good that OP is questioning.

Well what he's doing is a combination of questioning and baiting. He's looking for that one argument that will get him on board with the rest of the people, but he doesn't really know what it is, nor can he indicate what it might be because he can't formulate his own stance in a sensible way. Somewhere in his brain there's a knot and were expected to find it like a needle in a haystack so that it may be untied.

Until then he's going to remain obstinate. It's what happens when you depend entirely on Ti. Sometimes you have to be willing to go on past what you perceive to be illogical so that you may broaden your horizon and gain further knowledge, if you expect to build all your knowledge on a solid ground of perfect logical consistency you wont be able to build much at all.

You have to accept some things even if they don't make sense to you in order to be able to learn more. It's not so bad since you can always go back later on with your newfound knowledge to try and make sense of what you couldn't make sense of before.

 

[Pizzabeak]

Everything is static charges.

That's like saying this shoelace doesn't exist because it's comprised of individual strings roped up, or this shoe doesn't exist because it's made up of component parts. If particles exist then energy is a byproduct of interaction, obviously. That can happen, right.

However arbitrary descriptions may be, while arbitrary, at least aid a little bit in organization of granularity. If stuff is a byproduct of other stuff that doesn't mean byproduct doesn't exist.

All this can do is suggest we, this universe, might be inside something else, maybe a program or a hologram. Even so there are parameters we are seemingly bound to.

A lot of people don't even know what they're doing, they just go over here and occupy this space for x amount of time, and then go back over there, wash rinse repeat. Je sais bien, mais quand même.

 

[Cherry Cola]

k9b4 is Parmenides :P

 

[^_\\]

Well what he's doing is a combination of questioning and baiting. He's looking for that one argument that will get him on board with the rest of the people, but he doesn't really know what it is, nor can he indicate what it might be because he can't formulate his own stance in a sensible way. Somewhere in his brain there's a knot and were expected to find it like a needle in a haystack so that it may be untied.

Until then he's going to remain obstinate. It's what happens when you depend entirely on Ti. Sometimes you have to be willing to go on past what you perceive to be illogical so that you may broaden your horizon and gain further knowledge, if you expect to build all your knowledge on a solid ground of perfect logical consistency you wont be able to build much at all.

You have to accept some things even if they don't make sense to you in order to be able to learn more. It's not so bad since you can always go back later on with your newfound knowledge to try and make sense of what you couldn't make sense of before.

Sometimes you have to go beyond the narrative that makes you feel the most special, and gives you the most license to tell people they're stupid for not thinking like you. When someone says something and you don't see the point of it, that doesn't mean they're crying out for you to show them the error of their ways. Not about the current point, and especially not about how to think in general.


You'll know when you're being tempted to this kind of shittiness because you'll want to call people "obstinate" for not thinking like you, and "thinking like you" will seem like THINKING THE OBVIOUSLY CORRECT WAY, I CAN'T BELIEVE THIS IDIOT, *rolls eyes for everyone to see*, I SUPPOSE I WILL HAVE TO TALK SLOWLY. This is SO FRUSTRATING. Ugh.

 

[k9b4]

He can't touch energy with his hands therefore it doesn't exist, that's his whole argument

Maybe something does exist which is transferred between things which humans cannot perceive. It's entirely possible, I must admit. It is also entirely possible that inside my little finger there is a little alien who shrunk himself with a shrink ray and eats shrunken doritos with hummus sauce while masturbating his alien penis to 'how i met your mother' which he watches on a battery operated tv that he bought from a human shop and shrunk down so he can watch it. You must admit this is entirely possible also?

I think it is rather unlikely that this 'energy' thing exists.

I mean, if some energy thing existed, surely we would have noticed its effects on other things that we can perceive?

Since you seem to love telling me how I think, I'm gunna make it even and tell you how you think.

You lack sensing. Your senses are weak. You have lost touch with reality, since that is what our senses are for - perceiving reality.

You have this irrational bias against sensing, as if somehow intuition is better at perceiving reality, but it is not. Intuition is about forming concepts. How can you form concepts without good information from your senses?

You might think the above paragraph lands me in the 'sensor' box, but it does not. I am, and have always been better at understanding concepts than I have been at sports and physical activity. It's just that your sensing is even weaker than mine.

I completely understand that reality is not the same as we perceive it. I know that atoms are 99% empty space. I know that colour doesn't exist. I know that the only reason we perceive objects as solid is because only the electrons on the surface of an object are oscillating, if the electrons all the way through oscillate we perceive that object as transparent. To be honest I probably understand this better than you do.

are you now convinced that light/emwaves exist?

Yeah, I am. Thanks for helping me understand that one.

also what's your take on this(link)?

Not sure yet, this is one thing I think about often. Perhaps I will understand it soon.

That's like saying this shoelace doesn't exist because it's comprised of individual strings roped up, or this shoe doesn't exist because it's made up of component parts.

No it isn't. The shoelace does exist. The shoelace is made up of charges, which exist because they repel and attract other charges. Energy doesn't exist because it doesn't have any effect on charges.

Please don't reply to this paragraph by saying that EM waves affect charges, because EM waves are not energy. We say that EM waves 'have' energy, which simply means EM waves have the capacity to do work, because energy is defined as 'the capacity to do work'. Energy is not a thing which exists, it is simply a definition. The same way that x doesn't exist when you do abstract maths, x is simply a definition.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/einstein/expe-tyson.html

I watched the video, the guy just said that EM waves can somehow turn into electrons, which kind of makes sense.

I guess what he means is that as the wavelength of the EM wave gets smaller and smaller, eventually the oscillation of the EM field is almost vertical?

Remember though, EM waves =/= energy. Energy = the capacity to do work.

It is k9b4 vs. the world!!

A physics teacher I once had said something similar. He said 'if it's you against the world, I put my money on the world'. Lol.

 

[Brontosaurie]

Sometimes you have to be willing to go on past what you perceive to be illogical so that you may broaden your horizon and gain further knowledge, if you expect to build all your knowledge on a solid ground of perfect logical consistency you wont be able to build much at all. .

Sometimes you have to go beyond the narrative that makes you feel the most special, and gives you the most license to tell people they're stupid for not thinking like you. When someone says something and you don't see the point of it, that doesn't mean they're crying out for you to show them the error of their ways. Not about the current point, and especially not about how to think in general.

i think you both have good points

 

[Anktark]

Here is what I think of the topic:

E=mcc ∧ ΣE=0

So in a sense, kinda, but we have to deal with energy until the universe gets simplified to the end.

Is that what the OP is alluding? Even so, before making such claims, remember that current human communications are lacking and you ought to define what you mean by "real" and "exist" just to be clearer.


As for trusting one's senses- I have had dreams (or might be having one right now) that were more realistic than reality. Not to mention all the information we would be depriving ourselves of if we trusted only our senses. Both intuition and sensory information get processed in a same (similar) format in the brain and are essentially the same thing. Just like matter, energy and spacetime are. You can have preference or like one more than the other, but you are just (using) a different form of the same equation.

Also, we might need to revise that "99% empty" to 100%. And here I thought saying "You are empty" had got to be one of the greatest insults. Silly me.

 

[Cherry Cola]

dude your argument is highly intuitive imo, questioning something so basic is not something you do via sensing imho, unless you's a religious nut who doesn't believe in evolution or something like that but I see no such agenda from you, and besides with your latest post you did express yourself pretty clearly, I think the x analogy was cool

in any case I gotta rush to school but I don't see why you think that something needs to be a "thing" in order to exist, why can't it be movement and exist by virtue of that? Sure it looks silly if you single out movement, but thats why matter and energy are the same thing. I mean if we had things but no movement then they wouldn't exist either