0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I have perhaps a smaller problem with the definition of "weight": If we define it as the mass of an object times the acceleration due to the gravitational force, then there is a problem with g -- it is obviously variable at different places on the Earth's surface, but should the value of g include the contribution from centrifugal force, or only the one from the differing polar and equatorial radii of the Earth? It seems to me that if we are working in a convenient Earthbound frame of reference, then we will want the former for some purposes but the latter for others.
If you want to educate the public OR make it easy to educate themselves then you cant beat a clear & concise video
Books are by teacher for teachers...that is a general theme running through education.
Similarly, if we place an object on bathroom scales at the equator, and increase the rotational speed of the Earth, the object will appear to weigh less. However, we don't normally detect this effect, since the Earth retains a fairly steady rotation, and the oceans and the land of the Earth is already deformed into an oblate spheroid (the geoid) which takes the rotation of the Earth into account.
Weight has to be the force on a body due to a gravitational field.
Quote from: alancalverdWeight has to be the force on a body due to a gravitational field.That would imply that the weight of a body is subjective, i.e. depends on what the gravitational force on the body is.
If you had an elevator falling inside an elevator shaft at a rate of 4.95 m/s2. If a person was to step on a weight scale in this elevator then it would read half the weight he'd read if instead he was at home in the bathroom stepping on his bathroom scale and reading it that way.