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: Can this be true?



If you insist on the idealized model of the string as identical masses
connected by identical springs with identical "breaking tensions", and no
imperfections, then slowly and continuously stretching this model should
result in all springs failing at once!

-Bob

Bob Sciamanda (W3NLV)
Physics, Edinboro Univ of PA (em)
trebor@velocity.net
http://www.velocity.net/~trebor

"We have shown the symbol SQR(-1) to be void of meaning, or rather
self-contradictory and absurd." Augustus De Morgan in "On the Study and
Difficulties of Mathematics", 1831.


----- Original Message -----
From: Glenn A. Carlson <gcarlson@MAIL.WIN.ORG>
To: <PHYS-L@lists.nau.edu>
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 1999 10:44 AM
Subject: Re: Can this be true?
What if the string had mass, but was horizontal? Wht if the string was
supported from below, not from above (the string is perfectly straight
and plumb)? What if the string is not acted on by gravity? Change the
assumptions; we change the answer.

Real bodies break at imperfections (stress concentrations). Perfect
bodies don't break, or we wouldn't call them perfect.

There is no paradox here. The problem is accepting an idealization
("exactly the same all along") as describing reality ("a true
statement"). We can reach any conclusion we want if we make
sufficiently unrealistic assumptions. It is quite easy to reach
unrealistic conclusions from ideal (unreal) assumptions (e.g.,
"perfectly incompressible fluid," "frictionless surface," "all things
being equal," "if I were king of the world," "if pigs could fly,"
etc.).
. . .