Quote:
Originally Posted by meritflyer  Any and/or all if possible. |
Hmmm....we'll start with this. Let me know if there's something else you'd like references to.
From Sears and Zemansky’s “University Physics”, 10th edition, by Young and Freedman, p. 140.
Caution:>In doing problems involving uniform circular motion, you may be tempted to include an extra outward force of magnitude m(v^2/R) to “keep the body out there” or to “keep it in equilibrium”; this outward force is usually called “centrifugal force” (“centrifugal” means “fleeing from the center”). Resist this temptation, because this approach is simply
wrong! First, the body does not “stay out there”; it is in constant motion around its circular path. Its velocity is constantly in direction so it accelerates and is NOT in equilibrium. Second, if there were an additional outward (“centrifugal”) force to balance the inward force, there would then be no net inward force to cause the circular motion, and the body would move in a straight line, not a circle. Third, the quantity m(v^2/R) is not a force; it corresponds to the “ma” side of Sum(F)=ma and does not appear in Sum(F). It’s certainly true that a passenger riding in a car going around a circular path on a level road tends to slide to the outside of the turn, as though responding to a “centrifugal force.” But such a passenger is in an accelerating, non-inertial frame of reference in which Newton’s first and second laws don’t apply. As we discussed in Section 4-3, what really happens is that the passenger tends to keep moving in a straight line, and the outer side of the car “runs into” the passenger as the car turns (Fig. 4-8c). In an inertial frame of reference there is no such thing as a “centrifugal force” acting on a body. We promise not to mention this term again, and we strongly advise you to avoid using it as well.
http://www.amazon.com/Sears-Zemansky...e=UTF8&s=books
For something more accessible, here’s the Physics FAQ:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...al/centri.html