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: [Phys-l] bound vectors ... or not




I am tending toward John M's view - this discussion is unecessarily complicating a simple situation. For example: A velocity vector is a magnitude and direction - PERIOD. But it represents the velocity of SOMETHING. Identifying the object under consideration is ADDED (maybe necessary) information - the vector velocity has already been completely defined.

So too, a "free body diagram" (ugly, BAD choice of words) must specify the forces acting on a body and, if relevant, the points of application. The forces are completely defined by magnitudes and directions, but more is required for the FBD of a rigid body. Added information (points of action, temperature, weather conditions, etc may also need to be added as part of the model being constructed. PERIOD!
Why complicate with fuzzy wording? "Bound vs free vectors" is not universally relevant language and should only be used within some narrow context where the distinction is evident and clearly defines a real and useful difference.

Bob Sciamanda
Physics, Edinboro Univ of PA (Em)
treborsci@verizon.net
http://mysite.verizon.net/res12merh/