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: Real or not real, that the question!



I've mentioned this before. I use "frame" force instead of fictitious. I
prefer imaginary as the antonym of real, which is obviously inappropriate.

I'm waiting for someone to give an example of a fictitious force that is not
due to a Galilean, not, frame.

bc one of whose tasks was supervising the moving of the playground round
about @ UCSC.

Larry Smith wrote:

At 11:01 AM -0500 12/10/02, Ludwik Kowalski wrote:
On Tuesday, December 10, 2002, Savinainen Antti wrote:

The approach I have tried out
is to start treating forces arising from *interactions*. Force
is defined to be a measure of strength of interaction between
two objects.

The "two objects" seem important. How do you deal with fictitious forces?

My approach is different; the concept of force is introduced
as a "push or pull of any kind" that can be measured or
experienced, at least in principle.

Later we talk about real and fictitious forces; both kinds
are measurable with force-meters, at least in principle.

But in the latter case you can't identify the object that is exerting the
push or pull. Is that what you say?

Larry