Re: Forces

[DSCHROEDER@cc.weber.edu]

> While we're nit-picking, the terminology 'attractive potential' is of course
> confusing if we follow the common definitions for potential (PE per unit
> something or other) since Energy is a scalar quantity.  I suppose the
> terminology arises since we use potentials to get to the fields which are
> vectors.
>
> After two years of reading Phys-L and PhysLRNR, I no longer wonder why
> students are so confused.
>
> Rick

I don't think it's nit-picking to prefer the term "weak interaction"
to "weak force".  The prototypical weak process is beta decay, for
instance, n -> p + e- + antineutrino.  I don't think it helps students
to say that a "force" is responsible for this process.  Or take
e+ e- -> 2 photons.  This is an example of an electromagnetic interaction;
calling it an effect of the electromagnetic "force" would be rather
misleading, I think.

Dan