Yes, there are certain applications where the easier solution is some messy “real-world” model. But again, I wasn’t trying to apply Newtonian mechanics to the bubble problem. I was trying to draw a clear distinction between force and energy, which the OP seemed to have confounded. In order to do so, I invoked one of the very simplest laws of physics out there that he’d be sure to have heard. Surely you don’t contend that force is energy after all, do you?
Course not. I know we’re arguing way past the OP, which is not necessarily a bad thing, as I am usually too lazy to run my own threads.
Since nobody else is probably following this thread anymore, I’ll continue to stir things up by asserting that the modern theory of materials as propounded by Truesdell, Noll, etc. is no more messy or “real-world” than Newtonian mass-point mechanics; in fact, it has been successfully axiomatized, which is more than can be said of fundamental physical theories or even thermodynamics. It’s just more complex and has a wider range of application. The messiness lies in the applications, not in the theory itself.
And don’t call me Shirley.
Surely you can’t be serious!
Thanks for your considerable elucidation of the problem. You’re way past me though… I must admit that my college physics seems to have left me with a woefully deficient understanding of the field past Newtonian mechanics.
Is there anywhere a layman can start to get a simple, rudimentary (and hopefully short!) understanding of what field, Lagrangian, and Hamiltonian physics is all about?
Basically, you can ignore this whole exchange, which (again) was started out of a nitpick from my attempt to remind you that force and energy aren’t the same.
As for learning the other formalisms if you really want to (for your own edification), I don’t know of a very simple reference. The first exposure I had to the ideas was in Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics, by Arnol’d, but that’s probably beyond the math you took.
Well, I do have several years of statistics under my belt.
More relevant might be my calculus, and while I did pass the calculus requirements for engineers and physical science majors, it was many years ago.
Does anyone know if Gonick’s Cartoon Guide to Physics helps with this stuff or does it not go beyond Newtonian mechanics?
Luckily enough, the friend at whose condo I’m spending a few days has a copy. Unluckily, I don’t see any reference to Hamiltonian and Lagrangian mechanics. It does do electricity and magnetism, but really not in any way past what goes on in an AP Physics C class.