From: goldenfieldquaternions@gmail.com   
      
   On Saturday, February 17, 2018 at 4:14:35 AM UTC-6, Arindam Banerjee wrote:   
   > In the analysis of the Bohr model of the atom, the centripetal force is   
   > the electrostatic force between the electron and the protons in the   
   > nucleus; and the centrifugal force arises from the velocity of the   
   > electron, when held as a point mass.   
   >   
   > Centrifugal and centripetal forces are not fundamental forces. They are   
   > real or apparent forces resulting from the fundamental forces.   
   >   
   > For instance, the gravitational force is the centripetal force that   
   > moves the Earth around the Sun, and the Moon around the Earth, etc.   
   >   
   > The centrifugal force, that which according to standard thought keeps   
   > the Earth from falling into the Sun, has to exist in some fashion. How   
   > can it exist, though, if it is merely apparent and not real?   
   >   
   > What is the fact?   
   >   
   > The fact is that the centripetal gravitational force does pull the Earth   
   > to the Sun and the Earth is thus continuously "falling into" the Sun;   
   > however the existence of the Earth's velocity, always acting   
   > tangentially to the radial motion, keeps the Earth at the same distance   
   > from the Sun (almost). The Earth moves fast enough to keep the same   
   > radius - in the same time as it takes to get nearer the Sun had there   
   > been no Earth velocity, in that same time the Earth's tangential   
   > velocity is just sufficient to compensate for that loss of radial   
   > length.   
   >   
   > The above fact is obvious to us, as we are all a part of it all. But   
   > what do we really know about the atom, or more particularly, the   
   > electron which according to the most accepted model revolves around the   
   > nucleus? Surely there will be such shifts in the electron's orbit as are   
   > not discernible with the Earth orbit, for electrostatic effects from   
   > other orbiting electrons will be involved; and thus the individual   
   > electron's orbit should be more erratic than that of any heavenly   
   > body. The direct application of centrifugal force computations for the   
   > electron, by equating to the constant electrostatic centripetal force,   
   > for finding the basic parameters as velocity and radial distance, sounds   
   > rather simplistic, consequently.   
   >   
   > Cheers,   
   > Arindam Banerjee   
      
   Centripetal force is the ma part of Newton's second law. Given a force F   
   the F = ma relates this force as a dynamical quantity with the   
   acceleration that is really geometric or kinematic times the mass m that   
   is a scalar and kinematic. It is not hard to show with a circle and   
   similar triangles, one with angles subtended by the circle arc and the   
   other with change in momentum that ma = mv^2/r or mw^2r where w is   
   supposed to be "omega" for angular velocity.   
      
   Centrifugal force is the apparent force experienced on a rotating   
   frame. It is equal in magnitude to centripetal force but opposite in   
   direction. This is really due to being on a bad coordinate   
   frame. Newton's first law tells us that a particle is in a constant   
   state of motion or rest unless acted on by a force. In a rotating frame   
   one observes such accelerated motion without an apparent force. This   
   means accelerated frames are not really appropriate for Newtonian   
   mechanics.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)