/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9096527
>Why not? Centripetal points inward, and is a real force. There's a reaction for every force. So the fugal force is real.
that's a non-sequitur. centrifugal force is NOT equal and opposite to centripetal force. centrifugal force is NOT a reaction force to centripetal force.

You can have a centrifugal force without having a centripetal force, because the former is an ARTIFACT of an accelerating coordinate system, whereas the latter is a force that can be attributed to a physical cause.

For instance, take a particle with zero net force traveling at constant velocity in an inertial coordinate system. if you now try to describe the motion of the same particle in a rotating coordinate system, you discover the force is non-zero with centripetal and Coriolis components. These forces are not caused by any physical process, they are "correction" forces to account for apparent accelerations (read changes in velocity) introduced by your spinning ass; particles with zero physical forces on them DO NOT travel in straight lines in non-inertial coordinate systems.

If you are having trouble distinguishing between real and fictitious forces, forget rotation for the moment and first try to understand linear motion in a non-inertial reference frame.

The only solution, OP
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQoJo81lujk

>>8883797
for continuous shit:
Linear algebra
Real analysis
Ordinary Diff Eq
Partial Diff Eq
Complex analysis
Vector Analysis
Differential geometry

some other important shit:
Statistics
Abstract algebra
Signal processing
Algorithms and complexity Analysis