Re: [Phys-l] Strange Attractors and Reflectors

[John Mallinckrodt <ajm@csupomona.edu>]

On Jun 29, 2006, at 9:42 AM, Brian Whatcott wrote:

> One might walk upstage and declaim that an intuitive feel for the  
> effect of a generic inhomogenous field on generic particles may  
> well be helpful.
>
> But I wouldn't be so pretentious.

Allow me!

Without intending to overstate the pedagogical effectiveness of this  
particular toy.  It does have a certain aesthetic appeal and  
simplicity that draws one into playing with it.  Moreover, I believe  
toys like this *are* useful not only in developing intuition, but  
also in providing opportunities to apply the language of dynamics to  
observed features of particle motion.  Simply using terms like  
"conservative/nonconservative field," "central force," bound/unbound  
orbits," "elasticity" in describing the observed behaviors helps to  
organize those behaviors in one's mind and to explain them in terms  
of a relatively small number of features of the interactions--the  
same features, presumably, that the programmer ("intelligent  
designer"?) has used to write the program in the first place.

For instance, the one way nature of the barriers and their imperfect  
coefficient of restitution is useful both for creating traps and for  
effecting the energy loss required to create bound orbits.  It is  
also interesting to note that the small objects exert noncentral,  
nonconservative forces so that bound orbits do not persist.

John "Slo" Mallinckrodt

Professor of Physics, Cal Poly Pomona
<http://www.csupomona.edu/~ajm>

and

Lead Guitarist, Out-Laws of Physics
<http://www.csupomona.edu/~hsleff/OoPs.html>