[LMB] OT: physics, was Canonical STDs
paal at gis.net
Wed Dec 27 22:48:29 GMT 2006
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter H. Granzeau" <pgranzeau at cox.net>
> At 03:47 PM 12/27/2006, Paula Lieberman wrote:
>>>Perhaps, although I'm not sure I'd classify it as better. But you
>>>made a Doylist argument and I presented a Watsonian solution (and
>>Those terms NEVER stick with me, NEVER. I much prefer to
>>descriptive-that-are-not-pointer-descriptive descriptions... that is,
>>giving something someone's name, usually makes it a lot more difficult for
> This one I don't have problems with. Say "Doyle" and you're blaming the
> author, say "Watson'" and you are pretending that fiction is real.
Description in those terms, "blame the author" versus "pretend the fiction
is real" work for me, the names don't.
> Hertz I get. I don't get Joule or Farad or any of a myriad of other
> measurements (but then, I'm not a into physics, either).
I used to be able to remember Farad (of picofarad...) in terms of -other-
units, but its been way too long since I was using that stuff to
remember--I'd go back to the equations anf from the units of current and
resistance would derive the units of capacitance.
For newtos, F = m dv/dt, or force units = mass times distance divided by
time-squared -- velocity, v, is distance divided by time... a newton,
therefore, is a kilogram-meter-per-second-per-second.
More information about the Lois-Bujold