| 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] |
From: Ludwik Kowalski <kowalskiL@MAIL.MONTCLAIR.EDU>I'd probably buy that. The point is that the zero point really isn't rigorously arbitrary.
Joe Heafner wrote:
Regarding the chosen reference level, relativistically all potential
energy must go to zero when the interacting particles are infinitely
far apart.
I would say the same is true for "mutually interacting particles" in
classical physics. Right?
There are far too many innovations to list here. The entire approach is different and must be seen and read to be appreciated. M&I I is indeed the prequel to Electric & Magnetic Interactions, which is now renamed M&I II. The level is the same. It is indeed the first physics course for the vast majority of my students. The M&I web site is atThis interesting realization is but one of many wonderful and rich
outcomes of Chabay and Sherwood's superb text entitled "Matter
& Interactions I" (Wiley, 2002). I've used this text for three year
now (two preliminary editions and now the first edition). Chapters
4-6 in Volume I give the most correct and consistent (with respect
to correct terminology) treatment of energy methods in print to date.
Can you summarize what is really new, or very different, in these
chapters, in comparison with traditional textbooks? Is the level the
same as in their text "Electric and Magnetic Interactions?" Is the
course in which you use "Matter Interactions" the first physics
course for students who take it?