Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<v9287a$3u0v3$1@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!news.misty.com!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Luigi Fortunati <fortunati.luigi@gmail.com> Newsgroups: sci.physics.research Subject: Re: Inertia and third principle Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2024 21:15:56 PDT Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 26 Approved: Jonathan Thornburg [remove -color to reply]" <dr.j.thornburg@gmail-pink.com (sci.physics.research) Message-ID: <v9287a$3u0v3$1@dont-email.me> References: <v5357b$31hot$1@dont-email.me> <v5bk0b$taot$1@dont-email.me> <v5onk7$3skou$1@dont-email.me> <v62st1$234qv$1@dont-email.me> <v6j6ll$1c2i9$1@dont-email.me> <v72fvt$jcct$1@dont-email.me> <v7immp$1uej$1@dont-email.me> <v87fm1$ct7f$1@dont-email.me> <v8ki29$3a7sa$1@dont-email.me> <v8nask$3uqln$1@dont-email.me> <v8podn$h48j$1@dont-email.me> <v90lgs$3bfo1$1@dont-email.me> <v920hu$3rsb8$1@dont-email.me> Reply-To: fortunati.luigi@gmail.com X-Trace: individual.net 87LQvYOwaCrHIeTpdxPlkQd5+WAIvb9mwJ4tNXMGkNTKhNvI5umLttMI3a Cancel-Lock: sha1:+/lt13eavjeNbU4VMSFOa91b2rA= sha256:6LjrNbcXr/c7xnxxKmbzXG1SlhG8JKc8hMDfiPjFCy8= X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=2; AJvYcCUdlPf/nP7T6u/Fuouuk0G3xWMxjUPBJ7AX/iw2vrNgZIj6XxwjHTMXZT2atC9OsmyTE7DpX4SneEehOCkawfkOXUXSuhGOFj8X-Auth-Sender: U2FsdGVkX19Frw0tEscv+GeQ0DbrHSQnAaj/e+FD7NCwFtgMc+hXh4sYR7nh822J X-ICQ: 1931503972 Bytes: 2184 Mikko il 08/08/2024 10:56:30 ha scritto: >> But how much of that +11.25 is action force exerted by A against B and how >> much of that -11.25 is reaction force exerted by B against A? > > The two forces are equal. Obviously: 11.25 is equal to 11.25! You didn't realize that my question is about something else. >> Certainly, the force +11.25 on body B is exerted entirely by body A. >> >> However, not all of the -11.25 force on body A is exerted by body B. > > Yes, it is. And yet it isn't. Follow my reasoning to the end (I haven't completed it yet) and you will find out why it isn't. > You can prove that from the third law... Maybe you haven't noticed but it's the third law I'm contesting. Luigi Fortunati