Difference between centrifugal force vs reactive centrifugal force?

• Aeronautic Freek
In summary: In this case, the term "reactive centrifugal force" would be more accurate, as the force is reactive to the motion of the body.In summary, the difference between centrifugal force vs reactive centrifugal force is that centrifugal force is the force exerted by an object in a rotating reference frame while reactive centrifugal force is the force exerted by an object in a co-rotating frame. The interaction forces (also called “real forces”, but I prefer the term “interaction” as it is less philosophical and more descriptive) arise from interactions between objects. Importantly these interactions follow Newton’s
So on PF out of the term "reactive centrifugal force" the only non-annoying part is "force"

etotheipi
Dale said:
So on PF out of the term "reactive centrifugal force" the only non-annoying part is "force"
It's a momentum flow, darn it :-)

Edit: And may the Schwartz be with you always.

Last edited:
Dale and etotheipi
jbriggs444 said:
It's a momentum transfer, darn it :-)
Haha! But Star Wars just wouldn't be the same if the Jedi had to say "Use the momentum transfer, Luke!"

I just watched Rogue One again, so I guess it would be "I am one with the momentum transfer, the momentum transfer is with me ..."

jbriggs444 and etotheipi
I was allways excelent at math but allways strugle with physics and find very harder to understand than math..
I don't know if I am stupid or I have poor bascis of physics so it is hard to follow you ,but I find most of people consider physics harder to learn...

A.T. ,Dale,jbbriss44,Ibix etc,,are you proffesors of phyiscs or normal people,how you know physics so well?

Aeronautic Freek said:
A.T. ,Dale,jbbriss44,Ibix etc,,are you proffesors of phyiscs or normal people,how you know physics so well?
Purely amateur here. I do IP networking for a living. Though the team members have nick-named me "The Professor".

vanhees71, Aeronautic Freek and Dale
Aeronautic Freek said:
A.T. ,Dale,jbbriss44,Ibix etc,,are you proffesors of phyiscs or normal people,how you know physics so well?
I teach physics and programming professionally, but as an instructor in industry rather than at a university in academia

Aeronautic Freek
Aeronautic Freek said:
A.T. ,Dale,jbbriss44,Ibix etc,,are you proffesors of phyiscs or normal people,how you know physics so well?
It's a spare time thing for me as well, although I have done postdoctoral work in physics in the past.

Frames, switching between them, and keeping track of how representations change as you do so is non-trivial, I think. This confusion of terminology about centrifugal forces doesn't help.

Aeronautic Freek
jbriggs444 said:
It's a momentum flow, darn it :-)

Edit: And may the Schwartz be with you always.
Are you a proponent of the Karlsruhe Physics Course? This is however the worst product of physics didactics ever. It's maximizing the confusion of students and is in some parts conceptually wrong (applying the Gauß integral theorem to non-closed surfaces, selling entropy as the same as heat or as a modern form of phlogiston etc. etc.).

Aeronautic Freek said:
I was allways excelent at math but allways strugle with physics and find very harder to understand than math..
I don't know if I am stupid or I have poor bascis of physics so it is hard to follow you ,but I find most of people consider physics harder to learn...

A.T. ,Dale,jbbriss44,Ibix etc,,are you proffesors of phyiscs or normal people,how you know physics so well?
Well, if you are excellent at math, try theoretical physics!

• Mechanics
Replies
22
Views
1K
• Mechanics
Replies
1
Views
712
• Mechanics
Replies
11
Views
3K
• Mechanics
Replies
93
Views
6K
• Mechanics
Replies
12
Views
1K
• Mechanics
Replies
12
Views
3K
• Mechanics
Replies
24
Views
3K
• Mechanics
Replies
6
Views
1K
• Mechanics
Replies
15
Views
2K
• Mechanics
Replies
1
Views
1K