Thread View: bit.listserv.physhare
1 messages
1 total messages
Started by John Mallinckrodt
Fri, 24 Feb 1995 15:16
Re: mass as a verb
Author: John Mallinckrodt
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 15:16
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 15:16
36 lines
2211 bytes
2211 bytes
Joel Tassie writes: > John said: > > >I think I can make a pretty good case that that's > >exactly what a spring scale does and that, therefore, spring > >scales measure mass. > > I totally disagree here. Because if you go into outer space, where there is > no gravitation force, then what does your spring scale read? Zero. Does > that mean that the object doesn't have mass? No. > > A spring scale measures the force of gravity and that will change as the > gravitational field changes. You don't get the same value. To which others have in various ways written: >Amen. So allow me to state my position more explicitly. I know we don't really disagree on the pedagogical aspects of this issue: It IS important for students to distinguish "gravitational force" and inertial mass. But I'm afraid some of us are still missing the point that neither spring scales nor balance beams directly measure either gravitational force or inertial mass. As I and others have pointed out there are a lot of assumptions that go into the interpretation of the results obtained from either device. And as Einstein taught us, we can "make" a 9.8 N/kg "gravitational field" anywhere we want in the universe by simply firing our rockets. Now it's time to get this mass, er... that is, body to school. John Mallinckrodt Cal Poly Pomona ajmallinckro@csupomona.edu
Thread Navigation
This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.
Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.
Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.
Back to All Threads