Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: definition of weight



More evidence of projection: I couldn't understand the problem, the ~ was
there -- of course one kg weighs 2.2 pounds. Oh! ... it was reversed.

bc


Herbert H Gottlieb wrote:

On Fri, 24 Aug 2001 15:55:44 -0400 "Carl E. Mungan" <mungan@USNA.EDU>
writes:

I guess the only thing I'd add is that what I've outlined in this
document is not to be presented in a single lecture. It's to be
gradually meted out as one walks through 1D Kinematics, then 2D
Kinematics, then Newton's Laws, then Gravity, then ... for the
"typical" course.

Thanks for your clarification that you do not intend to present a
detailed
discussion of the term "weight" in a single lecture . Presenting such
information gradually certainly makes a lot of sense. In fact, I just
wish
that all of my professors had used this approach to make the
study of physics even more interesting for the students..

Around the middle of your second page there is a minor error " 2.2
kilograms weighs one pound at the earth's surface". This would only
be true
only at some distance above (or below) the earth's surface.

Oops, I meant 1 kg weighs 2.2 pounds! (You knew that, right?)

Of course I know that! I was just having some fun.

Herb

Thanks for your comments, Carl
--
Carl E. Mungan, Asst. Prof. of Physics 410-293-6680 (O) -3729 (F)
U.S. Naval Academy, Stop 9C, Annapolis, MD 21402-5026
mungan@usna.edu http://physics.usna.edu/physics/faculty/mungan/