Re: [Phys-L] The Poincare version? of Hypotheses non fingo

[Larry Smith <larry.smith@snow.edu>]

See April 2014 AJP 82(4), pp 349-353 for an article entitled "Accurate physical laws can permit new standard units: The two laws F = ma and the proportionality of weight to mass."

Larry



On Apr 22, 2014, at 3:51 PM, Rauber, Joel wrote:

> This quote is very similar comments from a regular on PHYS-L over the years (JD) who has argued forcefully against interpreting an equality as l.h.s. causes r.h.s or vice-versa; e.g. against interpreting   F=ma  as F causes a.
>
> JR
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Phys-l [mailto:phys-l-bounces@phys-l.org] On Behalf Of Bernard Cleyet
> Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 4:04 PM
> To: Forum Physics Educators
> Subject: [Phys-L] The Poincare version? of Hypotheses non fingo
>
> "When we say force is the cause of motion we talk metaphysics, and this definition, if we were content with it, would be absolutely sterile. For a definition to be of any use, it must teach us to *measure* force; moreover, that suffices; it is not at all necessary that it teach us what force is *in itself*, nor whether it is the cause or the effect of motion."
>    - Henri Poincare (1905)
>
>
> bc,  doesn't know where he found it.  
>
> Translation of the included paragraph:
>
> Hypotheses non fingo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia  
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypotheses_non_fingo
>
> _______________________________________________
> Forum for Physics Educators
> Phys-l@phys-l.org
> http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l
> _______________________________________________
> Forum for Physics Educators
> Phys-l@phys-l.org
> http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l