Thanks Dan, THAT has been my contention all along. NOT that it's 'kinetic' E but Energy of some description.
And with Jordan's post earlier --------------------------------- "This is correct regarding collisions, but it is important to note that although kinetic energy is not conserved in inelastic collisions, there is still an energy transfer from one object to another. In fact, an object can only have measurable momentum if it also has kinetic energy. When you mentioned that a wound channel is produced by direct applied force, this is indirectly saying that there is an energy transfer, since change in kinetic energy is equal to the force applied, integrated over the displacement of the tissue. Likewise, the change in momentum of the tissue is equal to the force applied, integrated over the time of interaction.
So there is no question that when a bullet strikes, there is a transfer of momentum, kinetic energy, and that there is a force applied which is responsible for these changes in the tissue. I think the reason that so many of us have become hyper-sensitive to the mere mention of the word "energy", is because of all the focus and emphasis that for decades was placed on energy as a metric of killing effectiveness, using distorted mechanisms and quantified thresholds. People used kinetic energy all wrong in trying to determine killing power, and now we can't stand when somebody brings it up. Kind of like our reaction to an over-played song coming on the radio (even if we liked the song when it was originally released)." ---------------------------- You TWO guys have satisfied my inquiry/curiosity/confusion.
I repeat what I've said repeatedly since joining the 'fire' in 2010...
No work gets done with out Energy.
Thanks Again
Jerry
edit to Correct My puter. It placed something ELSEWHERE than where I put it.
