Re: Forces w/o third-law partners???????

[Leigh Palmer <palmer@SFU.CA>]

> This is why centrifugal and other inertial forces are called
> "fictitious" in traditional Newtonian mechanics.

I think that thought is incomplete, Bob. Could you expand
on it a bit? I've never seen a good reason for the term
other than "It seems Newton's third law doesn't hold in an
accelerated frame *unless* I can call the force "gravity",
in which case it's OK that Newton's third law doesn't hold
because the force isn't real. (Tell that to the guys who
ride in NASA's centrifuge.)

There is no need to continue this traditional practice; it
does not make mechanical calculations easier. Mysticism
should be eliminated from physics whenever the opportunity
is presented, and the principle of equivalence affords us
that opportunity. There is no difference between inertial
forces and gravitational forces, just as there is no
difference between inertial mass and gravitational mass.

Leigh