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: Rolling friction (again)



Which is the original for the "traction" metaphor?

bc

"They avoid talking about two friction forces: instead of static =
friction they talk about *traction*. I think that their approach is m=
ore coherent than the one I presented.=20
=20"

[Antti]

"A briefing for Congress featuring Lomborg was held by the
"Cooler Heads Coalition" (formed to dispel the so-called "myth" of
global warming), and the author crisscrossed the country on a
book tour. Heavily promoted and bearing the imprimatur of the
Cambridge University Press, the book and its conclusions gained
considerable traction."

[Union of concerned Scientists review of the "Skeptical
Environmentalist".]

Savinainen Antti wrote:

Rolling friction has been discussed earlier in this list (I had a lar=
ge number of hits which I read through). I checked John Denker's web =


cut



A problem arises when rolling friction is analyzed further. According=
to Swartz & Miner rolling friction is the resultant of *friction* an=
d normal force which is not in line with the center of mass of the wh=
eel. They avoid talking about two friction forces: instead of static =
friction they talk about *traction*. I think that their approach is m=
ore coherent than the one I presented.=20
=20


cut

Regards,

Antti Savinainen
Kuopion Lyseo High School/IB
Finland
Homepage: <http://kotisivu.mtv3.fi/physics/>

Reference:

Swartz, C. and Miner, T. (1998). Teaching Introductory Physics - A so=
urcebook. Spinger-Verlag, New York.