Grabs popcorn. Gotta love how GTAM can turn a simple post explaining lean angles into a pissing match over who can use the fanciest physics word.
Grabs popcorn. Gotta love how GTAM can turn a simple post explaining lean angles into a pissing match over who can use the fanciest physics word.
Agreed... and even better is that at least one of them has some impressive credentials as I think he is a Chem prof at Queens U (although I could be mistaken).
The use of the word fictitious in the discussion of forces does not mean the same as "a work of fiction" or "a product of fantasy" in the literary sense. Fictitious means it can exist in a certain frame of reference, and possibly not in another frame of reference. Centrifugal forces exist in an inertial frame of reference but do not exist in a stationary frame of reference.
I know some of these wordsA centrifugal force is mathematically fictitious because it's an internal force. It can't be used during kinematic or dynamic analysis.
Centrifugal forces are not germane to discussing lean angle, CofG, cornering speed, etc.
Me too! Unfortunately they are: lean, angle, are, too...I know some of these words
I know some of these wordsI know some of these words
There is no such thing as centrifugal force. There is only centripetal. And while you may brush aside the kinematics of what's going on by using simple words like leaning, the equations and mechanics are anything but.