🚀 go-pugleaf

>
> Van, I already know that you think this is a fairly unimportant
> issue (i.e. the distinction between mass and weight), but when
> kids are trying to make sense of N1,2&3, it really is important
> for them to be able to distinguish between the 2.
>
> Van, I'm having a de ja vous (sp?) -- why did you start this?
> We've had our annual discussion of net force versus centripetal
> force -- I suppose the mass/weight issue was due.  8-)

I never said the mass vs weight distinction is unimportant.  It's very
important.  All I said was that I don't like the idea of using the intrinsic
property called MASS as a VERB.  Yes, I know that language changes, but it
changes because over time the general population begins to accept it, even
after those like me resist it.  The "inertia" of language is a good thing.
It prevents willy-nilly introductions of new terms.  If mass as a verb
becomes generally accepted in the scientific community I'll not be an old
fogey and fight it.  I'll just be an old fogey. (And you can decide if
"willy-nilly" is a good word.)

As for the mass/weight issue, I did not raise that.  But all of you know
my position on weight vs gravitational force, so I'll not stir the pot on
that one again.  For those who might not know and wish to discuss it with
me, contact me privately.

Centripetal force?  I didn't know there was such a thing.  Who ordered that?

Peace.


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Van E. Neie                                      ven@physics.purdue.edu
Purdue University
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------