On Sun, 10 Nov 2002 17:26:33 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann"
<
Franz....@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>
>This is entirely counter to the actual definition of angular momentum.
>There really is only one such definition. It is that
>L = r x p
>where L is the angular momentum of a particle about a point, r is the
>radius vector between the moving particle and the point and p is the
>momentum of the moving particle. The "x" is a vector cross product.
>Please, Porat, do us the favour of actually checking that definition in
>a real, honest to goodness, physics textbook before trying to reply in a
>mistaken way yet again. Please do not look it up in some garbled
>elementary book for first year engineering students. Such books are
>frequently bowdlerised to suit the clientele.
>
Is the generally accepted scientific definition of angular momentum
not A = mvr where m is mass, v velocity, and r radius?
If you don't mind I'll cross this to sci.philosophy.meta because
sci.physics moves so quickly, and I'm interested in seeing the reply.
Regards - Lester
remove DEL in address for email