155 grain Speer Gold Dot = 496 ftlbs
But since it this is made up, it really doesn't mean anything. And how do you come up with this sort of notion? Do you have any evidence to support this conjecture? Can you cite any authority to support it. As the experts I quoted in post 52 point out, the energy doesn't create the damage.
Your fundamental premise is fallacious.
The numbers were made up to illustrate my point, nothing more.
What do you mean where do I come up with such a notion? Work can't be done without energy, period. That is elementary school level science. A bullet in motion has a given amount of energy. That is also elementary school level science. The variables are where and how that energy is used. That is common sense. Some of the energy is used to displace air on the way to the target. Some is used penetrating, damaging, and moving the target. Some is often used behind the target.
The part we care about, the part used effectively, is the part used penetrating and damaging the target. That damage cannot occur without the energy to do it and all the energy in the world does no good behind the target. That is why we don't normally use fmj bullets to hunt with. There is nothing fallacious or "out of the box" about this. It is basic science and common sense.
Let me try phrasing this another way. The bullet does work because it possesses energy. Without that energy, it cannot do the work. Likewise, whatever work is done on anything other than damaging the target, is usually of little or no use.
It's not that energy is not a valid evaluative measure- it's just that it is so darned hard to use it in this role.
I agree with to some extent. The problem with using any one thing is that there are still other variables and they greatly effect the amount of damage done.