Re: [Phys-l] momentum and energy

[Hugh Haskell <hhaskell@mindspring.com>]

At 08:20  -0500 11/16/06, Spagna Jr., George wrote:
> Al Bachman writes:
>
>  >IMHO one should not push the topic of elastic collisions too much.
> > They are an idealized case that results in some "cute" mathematics.
>
> Which, it seems to me, elevates elastic collisions to the same status as
> spherical chickens ...
>
> We have to deal with simplified models, there is no hope of treating the
> real world exactly!
Everything we do in science is a simplified model, to some extent. 
But the center of mass means of dealing with elastic collisions that 
I have been touting here for the past few days is actually easier to 
visualize and compute than is the traditional model, and it is much 
more powerful, allowing a closer approach to the "real world" than is 
possible with the oversimplified model traditionally used.

As your tagline quote from Uncle Albert points out, things should be 
as simple as possible, but no simpler. IMO, the traditional approach 
goes to the too simple way and exceeds Einstein's more comprehensible 
statement of Occam's razor.

Hugh
--

************************************************************
Hugh Haskell
<mailto:haskell@ncssm.edu>
<mailto:hhaskell@mindspring.com>

(919) 467-7610

When you are arguing with a stupid person, it is a good idea to make sure that
person isn't doing the same thing.
					Anonymous