This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment Hi Don, <<Thirdly, the dynamic motion of the hammer has been described herein as = a linear problem, which it is not. >> Ah, yes, true. However, the same sorts of principles most of us have = been arguing apply equally to linear and angular systems. If linear = systems are so hard for everyone to understand, angular systems would = make most people's brains bleed! It's perhaps more useful, I think, = when talking about transfer of energy from one component to another to = another to another, to pretend like we're talking about a linear system, = even though it really ain't so. At least then it's possible to see how = energy is lost in the system, which was really my only point in the = first place -- before I got mired down in this whole thing. But since you raise the point, kinetic energy for a point mass = "orbiting" rotating about a point can also be described as (mv^2)/2. = Also, velocity is angular velocity times radius, torque is tangental = force times radius, etc. So it's really not so different from a linear = system, is it? Granted, angular moments of inertia are useful for = describing rotation of complex mass distributions, but for describing = something like a key lead, which is almost a point mass, aren't linear = terms really close enough? If my physics professors had asked us to = describe the kinetic energy of a roller coaster in angular terms, using = the radii of curves in the track and "torque" exerted by gravity, I = think there would surely have been a mutany! ;-) Peace, Sarah ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/ea/b4/16/60/attachment.htm ---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC