On rereading the recent correspondence on fictitious forces, I am glad to
see that in the perennial discussion of this issue at least some progress
seems to have been made: the main proponent of fictitious forces does
agree that such "forces" do not have any third law equal and opposite
counterparts acting anywhere in the universe. That is progress in
understanding some of the issues involved. But I am still confused. Are
we to teach our students that there are two completely equivalent types of
forces in the universe, one type having third law counterparts and the
other type not having such counterparts? And it was advised that it was
best not even to give different distinguishing names for the two types,
such as "inertial forces" for the second type? How could such a practice
not cause confusion? How could it be justified pedagogically? I am
genuinely seeking enlightenment on that issue.
A. R. Marlow E-MAIL: marlow@loyno.edu
Department of Physics, Box 124 PHONE: (504) 865 3647 (Office)
Loyola University 865 2245 (Home)
New Orleans, LA 70118 FAX: (504) 865 2453