- #1
Joans
- 22
- 0
Which formulation of Newton's second law is more fundamental??
Hi there!
I was Googling for interesting demonstrations in Physics, and I was lucky enough to find very interesting blog. Although it is completely new- the guy is writing it only for two weeks, but it already has a lot of nice physics demonstrations in it. All blog is about physics, so I am happy to share it with, although it is not the point of this discussion.
Here is the blog: http://triumphofmind.blogspot.com/
When I was reading that blog, I found that the guy writing it claimed that the formulation for second Newton's law of motion for constant mass object F=ma is not the fundamental one, and he emphasized that the right one is a=F/m. Although all sources including Wikipedia, HRW Principles of Physics, and other texbooks always write F=ma. And anyway is there any means of difference?
His argument is that acceleration is caused by the force, and not the force by acceleration as F=ma implies. But does causality matters here?
Also F=ma is direct result of fundamental formulation: F=dp/dt. And F=ma is mathematically more simple, because there is no risk of division by 0. Although for zero mass infinite acceleration souds reasonable...
Here is original post: http://triumphofmind.blogspot.com/2011/05/motion-of-matter-part-2.html
So what do you think?
Hi there!
I was Googling for interesting demonstrations in Physics, and I was lucky enough to find very interesting blog. Although it is completely new- the guy is writing it only for two weeks, but it already has a lot of nice physics demonstrations in it. All blog is about physics, so I am happy to share it with, although it is not the point of this discussion.
Here is the blog: http://triumphofmind.blogspot.com/
When I was reading that blog, I found that the guy writing it claimed that the formulation for second Newton's law of motion for constant mass object F=ma is not the fundamental one, and he emphasized that the right one is a=F/m. Although all sources including Wikipedia, HRW Principles of Physics, and other texbooks always write F=ma. And anyway is there any means of difference?
His argument is that acceleration is caused by the force, and not the force by acceleration as F=ma implies. But does causality matters here?
Also F=ma is direct result of fundamental formulation: F=dp/dt. And F=ma is mathematically more simple, because there is no risk of division by 0. Although for zero mass infinite acceleration souds reasonable...
Here is original post: http://triumphofmind.blogspot.com/2011/05/motion-of-matter-part-2.html
So what do you think?