Gene Fuller wrote:
Electrical potential energy has units of voltage multiplied by charge.
Voltage by itself is not potential energy, literally or otherwise.

I didn't mean to imply that voltage and energy are the same thing.
But voltage is indeed literally potential energy (per unit charge).
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

"Cecil Moore" bravely wrote to "All" (21 Dec 05 23:25:05)
--- on the heady topic of " Antenna reception theory"

CM From: Cecil Moore
CM Xref: core-easynews rec.radio.amateur.antenna:221661

CM Asimov wrote:
Voltage is kind of like having a big boulder
sitting on top of a high cliff.

CM Yep, it is. A big boulder sitting on top of a high cliff
CM contains a lot of potential energy. Voltage is literally
CM potential energy and cannot exist without energy.


If I can manage to roll the boulder up at the top or at the bottom of
the cliff, I will find it weighs about the same. The boulder only
picks up energy as it is accelerating towards the foot of the cliff.

A*s*i*m*o*v

Asimov wrote:
"Cecil Moore" bravely wrote to "All" (21 Dec 05 23:25:05)
--- on the heady topic of " Antenna reception theory"

CM From: Cecil Moore
CM Xref: core-easynews rec.radio.amateur.antenna:221661

CM Asimov wrote:
Voltage is kind of like having a big boulder
sitting on top of a high cliff.

CM Yep, it is. A big boulder sitting on top of a high cliff
CM contains a lot of potential energy. Voltage is literally
CM potential energy and cannot exist without energy.


If I can manage to roll the boulder up at the top or at the bottom of
the cliff, I will find it weighs about the same. The boulder only
picks up energy as it is accelerating towards the foot of the cliff.

A*s*i*m*o*v

W R O N G !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The boulder has energy simply because it is on top of the cliff.
[Potential Energy].

As it accelerates towards the bottom of the cliff the energy changes [
CHANGES ] from POTENTIAL to KINETIC.

The 11th commandment: Energy can be neither created nor destroyed: just
changed in type of energy.

A*s*i*m*o*v, you need to refresh your freshman University Physicss.

AK

Asimov wrote:
If I can manage to roll the boulder up at the top or at the bottom of
the cliff, I will find it weighs about the same. The boulder only
picks up energy as it is accelerating towards the foot of the cliff.

Energy cannot be created or destroyed. The kinetic energy gained
as it accelerates is exactly balanced by the loss in potential
energy that it had at the top of the cliff.

Consider a pendulum. When it stops at the limit of its swing,
it possesses potential energy. When it is moving at its fastest
at the bottom of its swing, it possesses kinetic energy. When
it finishes the swing to the other limit, it possesses potential
energy. Neglecting losses, potential energy at the top of the
swing is converted into an equal magnitude of kinetic energy at
the bottom of the swing and back to potential energy at the top
of the swing.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

"Cecil Moore" bravely wrote to "All" (22 Dec 05 14:47:46)
--- on the heady topic of " Antenna reception theory"

CM From: Cecil Moore
CM Xref: core-easynews rec.radio.amateur.antenna:221698

CM Asimov wrote:
If I can manage to roll the boulder up at the top or at the bottom of
the cliff, I will find it weighs about the same. The boulder only
picks up energy as it is accelerating towards the foot of the cliff.

CM Energy cannot be created or destroyed. The kinetic energy gained
CM as it accelerates is exactly balanced by the loss in potential
CM energy that it had at the top of the cliff.

CM Consider a pendulum. When it stops at the limit of its swing,
CM it possesses potential energy. When it is moving at its fastest
CM at the bottom of its swing, it possesses kinetic energy. When
CM it finishes the swing to the other limit, it possesses potential
CM energy. Neglecting losses, potential energy at the top of the
CM swing is converted into an equal magnitude of kinetic energy at
CM the bottom of the swing and back to potential energy at the top
CM of the swing.

Consider the Earth-Moon system, they interact via the oceans on Earth.
The water level bulges can be considered as the pendulum in your
example. The result of the tide is that gravitational energy is being
transfered to the Moon and it is gradually accelerating away from the
Earth. So in your example the pendulum doesn't have any energy except
that which it borrows and returns to the Earth's pull of gravity. If
we were to follow your logic the Moon should fall to the Earth
instead. Assuming frictionless bearings and zero drag your pendulum
should go on forever because it has no energy of its own.

A*s*i*m*o*v

Asimov wrote:

"Cecil Moore" bravely wrote to "All" (22 Dec 05 14:47:46)
--- on the heady topic of " Antenna reception theory"

CM From: Cecil Moore
CM Xref: core-easynews rec.radio.amateur.antenna:221698

CM Asimov wrote:
If I can manage to roll the boulder up at the top or at the bottom of
the cliff, I will find it weighs about the same. The boulder only
picks up energy as it is accelerating towards the foot of the cliff.

CM Energy cannot be created or destroyed. The kinetic energy gained
CM as it accelerates is exactly balanced by the loss in potential
CM energy that it had at the top of the cliff.

CM Consider a pendulum. When it stops at the limit of its swing,
CM it possesses potential energy. When it is moving at its fastest
CM at the bottom of its swing, it possesses kinetic energy. When
CM it finishes the swing to the other limit, it possesses potential
CM energy. Neglecting losses, potential energy at the top of the
CM swing is converted into an equal magnitude of kinetic energy at
CM the bottom of the swing and back to potential energy at the top
CM of the swing.

Consider the Earth-Moon system, they interact via the oceans on Earth.
The water level bulges can be considered as the pendulum in your
example. The result of the tide is that gravitational energy is being
transfered to the Moon and it is gradually accelerating away from the
Earth. So in your example the pendulum doesn't have any energy except
that which it borrows and returns to the Earth's pull of gravity. If
we were to follow your logic the Moon should fall to the Earth
instead. Assuming frictionless bearings and zero drag your pendulum
should go on forever because it has no energy of its own.

A*s*i*m*o*v

A*s*i*m*o*v, Man you gotta be kidding !!!!!! The tides are responding
to the gravitational reaction of the earth-moon gravitational system;
not causing them!!!!!!!!

Yep, in the absence of centripetal acceleration the moon would crash.
But, isn't nature wonderful!! The moon has just enough centripetal
acceleration to keep it from falling into the earth. The sum of forces
on the moon keep it from flying into space or from falling to earth.

As I said in a previous post; You need to refresh your University
Physics 101.

AK

Amos Keag wrote:
The sum of forces
on the moon keep it from flying into space or from falling to earth.

Actually, that's only short term. The moon is presently receeding
and will someday reverse that trend and indeed fall to earth.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp