this post was submitted on 26 Apr 2024
107 points (92.8% liked)

Futurology

1610 readers
182 users here now

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

Nah, that's a nitpick. In common English heat is just presence of high temperatures, and there's no specific word for thermal energy.

Also, that would be heat/time, so power basically. The sum of all heat currently in the sun would be larger, considering how slow the convection is among other things.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

We're talking about energy generation, so the distinction is pretty important. I think a layperson can understand that it takes far more heat to boil a pot of water than a match can produce, even if the match is at a higher temperature than the stove top.

A layperson would describe the heat of a campfire as being much higher than the heat of a candle, even if theyre the same temperature.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

Yeah, I guess that's fair. They're definitely talking about temperature, and I think most would understand it that way, because the layman might not even know the connection between higher temperatures and better heat engines, but economically speaking it's not super relevant. The actual power output is probably negligible; it's a research machine.