sci.physics.electromag

On Mar 20, 11:36=A0pm, Benj wrote:
> On Mar 20, 10:05 pm, maxwell wrote:
>
> > > Dear Radi,
> > > Forces are obviously real and fields are a mathematical idea.
> > > Benj
>
> > Sorry, guys, even forces also not real. =A0You are just extrapolating
> > from the time-averaged muscular sensations we all experience. =A0Force
> > is also a mathematically defined concept (see Newton's Principia).
>
> Max,
> No, forces are real because they cause things to move and experience
> action. "force fields" on the other hand are NOT real! (obviously)
> However, you are right that "mathematically defined" force as a
> "model" for the "action" that pushes things around is not real. =A0One
> does not need "muscle sensations" to establish "force" (we had better
> call it "actions") as one can also do it with apparatus where
> "muscles" are not involved. =A0However, if action is not real, then that
> means that we are all still in the Matrix!
>
> Yikes! This all shows how sloppy we have all become with the meaning
> of words.
Benj, there is another concept that justifies why things move apart
from 'force'. Just to make this interesting, check out p.19 of the
Principia (transl. Motte, Prometheus) & remember, Newton wrote in
Latin, so his original word was 'vis' that today is translated as
'force' but modern physics (like Newton) has another term.