Motion
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Free fall
Next: 50% OF POPULATION BELOW AVG IQ!
From: TomGee on 18 Sep 2005 14:59 Oh My Gawd, Worms! Read the last sentences in the last three paragraphs of my post! Or get someone to read them to you.
From: Don1 on 18 Sep 2005 15:45 Herman Trivilino wrote: > "Don1" <dcshead(a)charter.net> wrote ... > > > 3) Resultant motion is the algebraic sum of inertial motion and forced > > displacement, and can be written mathematically as d/t=l/t + s/t; or as > > d/t=l/t + (a/2)t^2: > > I thought my example of the motion of the Plymouth Prowler made it clear to > you that this formulation gives results that don't match the way cars really > move. > > Is it not supposed to do that?! > > These motions are just the basic premises, or postulates. All actual motion is affected by various forces such as the power source and all kinds of friction. Not to mention that the Prowler is a unique automobile. Don
From: Don1 on 18 Sep 2005 15:51 Sam Wormley wrote: > Newton is much more precise Snip< > > "Newton's [second] law completely describes all the phenomena > of classical mechanics...." I don't think so. Don
From: Sam Wormley on 18 Sep 2005 16:13 TomGee wrote: > Oh My Gawd, Worms! Read the last sentences in the last three > paragraphs of my post! Or get someone to read them to you. > Will you read it for me?
From: Sam Wormley on 18 Sep 2005 16:13
Don1 wrote: > Sam Wormley wrote: > >>Newton is much more precise > > Snip< > >> "Newton's [second] law completely describes all the phenomena >> of classical mechanics...." > > > I don't think so. > > Don > How so? |