| Revision as of 12:51, 7 November 2005 editMarSch (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users8,553 edits definition of 1Newton← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:17, 13 December 2005 edit undoGracenotes (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers18,359 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
| <blockquote>A newton is the amount of force required to accelerate a mass of one kilogram at a rate of one metre per second squared.</blockquote> | <blockquote>A newton is the amount of force required to accelerate a mass of one kilogram at a rate of one metre per second squared.</blockquote> | ||
| Seems clear enough. 1kg is clear, 1 m/s^2 is clear. No wait a minute, it is not clear. This applies only to so-called ]s. --] 12:51, 7 November 2005 (UTC) | Seems clear enough. 1kg is clear, 1 m/s^2 is clear. No wait a minute, it is not clear. This applies only to so-called ]s. --] 12:51, 7 November 2005 (UTC) | ||
| == More Newton Definition Things == | |||
| In a recent revert, ] stated: | |||
| <blockquote>(revert un-logged in Gracenotes, math markup is a bad thing when you are too lazy to fix never-to-be-italicized symbols)</blockquote> | |||
| This is a little ambiguous. | |||
| There are people who use reverts a lot, and reverting is a good thing usually. But even if the math tags were somehow faulty or misused, I believe that the explanation of the units was much more explicit and helpful than the "is it was it is" explanation that existed before my editing and after the revert. | |||
| I had written:<br> | |||
| <nowiki>The newton is the ] unit of force. It is named after ] for the extensive work he did on the subject. Like all forces, it is calculated with <math>f=ma</math>. A ''newton'' is the amount of force required to ] a ] of one ] at a rate of one ].</nowiki> | |||
| <nowiki>This means that, in the MKS metric system, a newton is equal to a <math>kg \cdot \frac{m}{ s^2 }</math>. However, this is commonly re-written as <math>\frac{kg \cdot m}{ s^2 }</math>.</nowiki> | |||
| <nowiki>Thus, a ''newton'' is defined as the amount of force required to ] a ] of one ] at a rate of one ].</nowiki> | |||
| Now, the current definition uses negative exponents -- something that is almost never used in any formal statement of a mathematical definition or concept. | |||
| I also agree with ]. This article doesn't even get into (or mention) ficticious forces such as centrifugal force or motion in an accelerated frame of reference. | |||
| Regards, ] 17:17, 13 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 17:17, 13 December 2005
Old talk at Talk:Newton (unit)
I think Newton should be the disambiguation page. Take a look at how many different kinds of articles link to it. It's not like Paris, which has dozens of linkers (of which almost all go to the French city, one or two to the legendary figure, and none to Paris, Texas).
Newton could be the poster child of disambiguation, with an almost perfect balance of references to the British guy, the SI unit, and the PDA.
Just my 2¢. --Ed Poor 15:02 Aug 16, 2002 (PDT)
See my post in the other talk. Sir Issac has a first name, the PDA's name is not just Newton and the cities can be naturally disambiguated. Therefore there is no need to do full disambiguation (a block is more than enough). --mav
Hold your horses, I agree already!! --Ed Poor
It's not appropriate to cite the standard gravity to huge precision here: real Earth gravity varies by a few tenths of one percent across the Earth, gross enough to detect with a simple spring weighing device, let alone an electromagnetic balance. -- The Anome 18:14, 4 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Newton and apples
Just to note: Isaac Newton *contemplated* apples as explained in Isaac Newton and http://www.newtonproject.ic.ac.uk/texts/rsstukeley_n.html. after dinner, the weather being warm, we went into the garden, & drank thea under the shade of some appletrees, only he, & myself. amidst other discourse, he told me, he was just in the same situation, as when formerly, the notion of gravitation came into his mind. "why should that apple always descend perpendicularly to the ground," thought he to him self: occasion'd by the fall of an apple, as he sat in a comtemplative mood: "why should it not go sideways, or upwards? but constantly to the earths centre? assuredly, the reason is, that the earth draws it. there must be a drawing power in matter. & the sum of the drawing power in the matter of the earth must be in the earths center, not in any side of the earth. therefore dos this apple fall perpendicularly, or toward the center. if matter thus draws matter; it must be in proportion of its quantity. therefore the apple draws the earth, as well as the earth draws the apple."
The story about an apple hitting him on the head is an urban legend. Bobblewik 11:24, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
definition of 1Newton
A newton is the amount of force required to accelerate a mass of one kilogram at a rate of one metre per second squared.
Seems clear enough. 1kg is clear, 1 m/s^2 is clear. No wait a minute, it is not clear. This applies only to so-called inertial frames. --MarSch 12:51, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
More Newton Definition Things
In a recent revert, Gene Nygaard stated:
(revert un-logged in Gracenotes, math markup is a bad thing when you are too lazy to fix never-to-be-italicized symbols)
This is a little ambiguous. There are people who use reverts a lot, and reverting is a good thing usually. But even if the math tags were somehow faulty or misused, I believe that the explanation of the units was much more explicit and helpful than the "is it was it is" explanation that existed before my editing and after the revert.
I had written:
The newton is the ] unit of force. It is named after ] for the extensive work he did on the subject. Like all forces, it is calculated with <math>f=ma</math>. A ''newton'' is the amount of force required to ] a ] of one ] at a rate of one ].
This means that, in the MKS metric system, a newton is equal to a <math>kg \cdot \frac{m}{ s^2 }</math>. However, this is commonly re-written as <math>\frac{kg \cdot m}{ s^2 }</math>.
Thus, a ''newton'' is defined as the amount of force required to ] a ] of one ] at a rate of one ].
Now, the current definition uses negative exponents -- something that is almost never used in any formal statement of a mathematical definition or concept.
I also agree with MarSch. This article doesn't even get into (or mention) ficticious forces such as centrifugal force or motion in an accelerated frame of reference. Regards, Gracenotes 17:17, 13 December 2005 (UTC)