Re: F=ma: law or theory?

[David Bowman <David_Bowman@GEORGETOWNCOLLEGE.EDU>]

Regarding Robert Cohen's question:

> OK, F=ma can be derived from something else.  Are you saying that the
> "something else" is a theory?

The something else is a principle, i.e. Hamilton's Principle.  On it
hang
all the laws of classical mechanics.

> Can you be more clear on what might make
> F=ma a theory instead of a law?  I interpret "theory" to imply
"explanatory"
> whereas "law" implies "empirical".  Maybe that is my mistake here.

It is a *law*--Newton's 2nd as I recall.

David Bowman
David_Bowman@georgetowncollege.edu