Quote:
On 2002-08-11 23:13, Richard J. Hanak wrote:
Nowhere in the principia did he invoke the ideas of ‘net force,’ ‘zero net force,’ or ‘non-zero net force.’ The key is the phrase ‘motive force.’ If a body is restrained from movement and a force acts on it there will be two equal and opposite stationary forces. If a body is not restrained from movement there will be two equal and opposite moving forces: the motion producing force and the inertial force opposing it. If an object capable of generating a force met no opposition it could not even generate a force. Furthermore, if a body did not produce an opposing inertial force, any applied infinitesimal force would give it infinite acceleration. The inertial force met by a motive force is why the acceleration is in proportion to the motive force.
|
OK, I see no problem here. So again, what the point? Is there one? Or are you just having a Newtonian mechanics love affair?
Where is it going? I know this is going to bring you back a few years Richard, but remember when your high school English teacher taught you that every essay must have a title, a theme, and yes, a conclusion? Maybe you were out that day.
Do I perceive that you are going to use Newtonian mechanics now to promote.... er ,...choke .. cough.....ugh...geocentrism??? [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]
G^2
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Gsquare on 2002-08-12 22:05 ]</font>