Re: Conservation of ME and nonconservative forces

["John S. Denker" <jsd@MONMOUTH.COM>]

At 03:56 PM 6/28/01 -0500, QUIST, OREN wrote:
> I stand by what I said!
>
> My only regret is that I forgot to also point out the attempts to try to
> incorporate rolling friction into the problem.

And I stand by what I said!

The original question
  http://mailgate.nau.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0106&L=phys-l&F=&S=&P=24972
was a question about
>>>  friction at the point of contact between ball and surface. ??

... and I continue to think that it was a reasonable question, indeed a
very good question.

... or has there been a rules-change while I wasn't looking?  Is the new
rule that freshmen (and their teachers) are not allowed to question the
assumptions in the textbook?  Are they not allowed to enquire as to the
physical basis (and the limitations) of the approximations used?