|
No edit summary
|
|
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start| |
|||
{{physics|class=Stub|importance=|auto=yes}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Physics|importance=mid}} |
|||
}} |
|||
== Corrections == |
|||
The page contained this: |
|||
A free body possesses two fundamental properties that make the concept useful in analyzing [[static equilibrium|static]] and [[dynamic equilibrium]]: |
|||
* The internal forces of the free body are, by definition, assumed to completely off-set one another so that the body as a whole is in static equilibrium. |
|||
* As a consequence, the body can be treated as a single entity with its total [[mass]] located entirely at the [[center of mass]] and subject to [[Newton's laws of motion#Newton.27s second law: fundamental law of dynamics|Newton's second law]] |
|||
I have removed these sentences because |
|||
The 2 important properties are inconsistent with the previous sentences. |
|||
1) A free body need not be in equilibrium |
1) A free body need not be in equilibrium |
||
2) Forces need not act through the centre of mass - torques are quite okay |
2) Forces need not act through the centre of mass - torques are quite okay |
||
| Line 8: | Line 21: | ||
[[User:139.80.48.19|139.80.48.19]] 22:28, 9 September 2007 (UTC) |
[[User:139.80.48.19|139.80.48.19]] 22:28, 9 September 2007 (UTC) |
||
==Re-rating quality class== |
|||
I'm rating this article up to Start-class quality. [[User:Bryanrutherford0|Bryanrutherford0]] ([[User talk:Bryanrutherford0|talk]]) 19:54, 25 October 2013 (UTC) |
|||
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
The page contained this:
A free body possesses two fundamental properties that make the concept useful in analyzing static and dynamic equilibrium:
I have removed these sentences because
1) A free body need not be in equilibrium 2) Forces need not act through the centre of mass - torques are quite okay
139.80.48.19 22:28, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm rating this article up to Start-class quality. Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 19:54, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
