Re: funny capacitor (EUREKA ?)

["RAUBER, JOEL" <JOEL_RAUBER@SDSTATE.EDU>]

Two comments (quibbles perhaps):

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John S. Denker [mailto:jsd@MONMOUTH.COM]
>
> 1) Generally, I think it is unscientific to argue over what is
> "traditional" or not.  It reminds me of fundamentalist
> religion, not science.

I think the context of this kind of comment "as traditionally done" is not a
dogmatic statement, but rather a short hand way of saying "as is usually
presented in many classes and textbooks . . ."

> There are lots of things that I consider part
> of physics that

>   -- Absolute velocity (as opposed to velocity relative to
> some frame).

I suppose that the idea of "absolute velocity" is a physics concept, even if
SR tells us there ain't no such animal; at least if you are a Machian; but
we are getting dangerously close to metaphysics.

> It's like saying that the velocity of frame A is zero
> relative to frame
> A.  It's a tautology.  It tells us nothing about the size or
> location of
> frame A.

I find that this statement is far from a trivial tautology and its
implications need to be understood by folks.  Failure to not understand it
causes endless confusion in solving problems using instantaneously co-moving
reference frames.

Joel Rauber