Re: [Phys-l] g...

[Herb Gottlieb <herbgottlieb@juno.com>]

On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 17:57:49 -0500 Hugh Haskell <hhaskell@mindspring.com>
writes:
> Calling g, and acceleration, or even dressing it up with the new 
> symbol a_g, isn't going to solve the problem, IMO. The point is, 
> that  g is *not* and acceleration. It happens to have the units of 
> acceleration because of an "accident" but that is really irrelevant 
> to the physics. It also makes it easier to understand why all object 
> accelerate the same way under the influence of gravity alone, 
> whereas  the same is most definitely not true with electricity.
> Hugh

1) Why "g " is not an acceleration . 
Doesn't "g" refer to something that changes velocity as it travels?

2) What is the "irrelevant accident" of physics that you cite here?

3) Why isn't the same true of electricity?
Won't an isolated electron in outer space be accelerated similarly when
it happens to be in an electric field?

Herb