• look at this

    From RichD@21:1/5 to All on Thu May 4 14:46:09 2023
    An analysis of the canonical ice skater:

    https://phys.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Classical_Mechanics/Variational_Principles_in_Classical_Mechanics_(Cline)/12%3A_Non-inertial_Reference_Frames/12.08%3A_Coriolis_Force


    I don't dispute his analysis, though his notation and
    presentation is awful.

    However, I don't accept his conclusion: the chemical
    muscle energy which withdraws the arms, eventually
    stores as kinetic energy in the flywheel (the skater).

    --
    Rich

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ross Finlayson@21:1/5 to RichD on Fri May 5 18:29:44 2023
    On Thursday, May 4, 2023 at 2:46:11 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
    An analysis of the canonical ice skater:

    https://phys.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Classical_Mechanics/Variational_Principles_in_Classical_Mechanics_(Cline)/12%3A_Non-inertial_Reference_Frames/12.08%3A_Coriolis_Force


    I don't dispute his analysis, though his notation and
    presentation is awful.

    However, I don't accept his conclusion: the chemical
    muscle energy which withdraws the arms, eventually
    stores as kinetic energy in the flywheel (the skater).

    --
    Rich

    It reduces the angular moment?

    It sort of seems like that force for "f = ma" is to be a derived quantity instead of a defined quantity, about things like "m/s or s/m, which
    one should be, velocity or inverse velocity" about the changes in
    units over time, over time.

    It's like in a system of potentials, that, the potential increases,
    then, it sort of "runs out" instead of "builds up".

    I.e., in a theory where "it's sum potentials what are real and
    the classical is inverted", it's a thing.

    I put it in these terms because you can't really hear "centrifugal"
    when "the pail-experiment has a centripetal force", that there
    only is a "true centrifugal" in the "sum of potentials".
    There's a usual ambiguity of centrifugal and centripetal.
    Then also "Coriolis" is another, "force", here that otherwise
    expresses exchanging potential energy the lever moment of
    the arm for the potential energy the angular bit.

    It's kind of like framing it in a "sum-of-histories" for path integral,
    that "sum-of-potentials" is real.

    In Einstein's Out of My Later Years he looks at a sort of
    attack on classical motion for his total field theory, ...,
    I sort of frame that in terms of: "Newton's Zero'eth laws".

    This is about where "bringing to motion" and "coming to rest"
    are two different things: yes I know that's separate or extra
    the usual notion they are same.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ross Finlayson@21:1/5 to Ross Finlayson on Fri May 5 21:04:27 2023
    On Friday, May 5, 2023 at 6:29:46 PM UTC-7, Ross Finlayson wrote:
    On Thursday, May 4, 2023 at 2:46:11 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
    An analysis of the canonical ice skater:

    https://phys.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Classical_Mechanics/Variational_Principles_in_Classical_Mechanics_(Cline)/12%3A_Non-inertial_Reference_Frames/12.08%3A_Coriolis_Force


    I don't dispute his analysis, though his notation and
    presentation is awful.

    However, I don't accept his conclusion: the chemical
    muscle energy which withdraws the arms, eventually
    stores as kinetic energy in the flywheel (the skater).

    --
    Rich
    It reduces the angular moment?

    It sort of seems like that force for "f = ma" is to be a derived quantity instead of a defined quantity, about things like "m/s or s/m, which
    one should be, velocity or inverse velocity" about the changes in
    units over time, over time.

    It's like in a system of potentials, that, the potential increases,
    then, it sort of "runs out" instead of "builds up".

    I.e., in a theory where "it's sum potentials what are real and
    the classical is inverted", it's a thing.

    I put it in these terms because you can't really hear "centrifugal"
    when "the pail-experiment has a centripetal force", that there
    only is a "true centrifugal" in the "sum of potentials".
    There's a usual ambiguity of centrifugal and centripetal.
    Then also "Coriolis" is another, "force", here that otherwise
    expresses exchanging potential energy the lever moment of
    the arm for the potential energy the angular bit.

    It's kind of like framing it in a "sum-of-histories" for path integral,
    that "sum-of-potentials" is real.

    In Einstein's Out of My Later Years he looks at a sort of
    attack on classical motion for his total field theory, ...,
    I sort of frame that in terms of: "Newton's Zero'eth laws".

    This is about where "bringing to motion" and "coming to rest"
    are two different things: yes I know that's separate or extra
    the usual notion they are same.


    I really like how in the next section the author gets into the Routhian,
    which helps a lot to explain the potentials and oscillating in these things.


    When I was a kid my dad had a dog, it was Butch,
    it was an English Springer Spaniel, and really got around,
    he trained it one thing, when he went "Babe Ruth",
    it bayed "Routh".

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)