Question about the four forces...

[Mongoose]

I need to clear something up...

From what I understand, there are four fundamental forces:

Gravitational force: pretty self explanatory; force behind gravity. Very weak compared to the other forces.

Electromagnetic force: force that causes like charges to repel and unlike charges to attract. Also the force behind electromagnetic radiation.

Strong force: the force that holds the atomic nuclei together.

Weak force: the force that causes radioactive decay of atomic nuclei.

My question is this: does kinetic force, i.e. the force behind movement, fit into any of these categories? If so, which one(s), and how does it do so? Or is kinetic force irrelevant to these?

 

[Locrian]

There is no "kinetic force." Any of the four forces you listed can alter the kennetic energy of an object, thereby changing it's velocity... though of course this simple classical description must be retooled to be accurate, I hope it will suffice here.

 

[Mongoose]

There is no "kinetic force."

Hmm, then perhaps a better way to word it would be "motion."

Any of the four forces you listed can alter the kennetic energy of an object, thereby changing it's velocity... though of course this simple classical description must be retooled to be accurate, I hope it will suffice here.

Heh, nope, won't suffice, but at least it answers part of my question as to the relationship between these concepts.

 

[Locrian]

Then you'll need to take your first class in quantum mechanics. That's where the issue of energy and fields begins to become more subtle.

 

[Mongoose]

Then you'll need to take your first class in quantum mechanics. That's where the issue of energy and fields begins to become more subtle.

Heh, this sounds familiar. I always get answers like that from physics professors when I ask questions like these. I guess I should have seen it coming. Fortunately, I am, in fact, looking at doing a physics major after I finish all my liberal education.

 

[Illuminatus]

As I remember, the electromagnetic and weak nuclear forces are actually two different aspects of the same force, called the "electroweak" force. So in reality, there's only three fundamental forces.

 

[Locrian]

Heh, this sounds familiar. I always get answers like that from physics professors when I ask questions like these.

Yea, it's a pretty unsatisfactory answer. When I think of a reasonably accurate and short other answer, I promise to try!

 

[Iron Sun 254]

Actually they've been able to tie electomagnetism, the strong and the weak force together leaving two forces and, if Einstein was correct (and I suspect he was), gravity isn't even a force.

 

[Illuminatus]

Actually they've been able to tie electomagnetism, the strong and the weak force together leaving two forces and, if Einstein was correct (and I suspect he was), gravity isn't even a force.

They managed to tie the SNF into the electroweak force as well? That's cool, do you have a link?

 

[Deamiter]

My question is this: does kinetic force, i.e. the force behind movement, fit into any of these categories? If so, which one(s), and how does it do so? Or is kinetic force irrelevant to these?

To again attempt to answer the OP, you see some very clear examples of some of these forces producing motion every day. Obviously gravity exerts a force on an object causing it to accelerate. There is no "kinetic force" but when the force of gravity accelerates an object, the object's kinetic energy is increased.

Also with electromagnetic forces. When you put two like-poles of two magnets next to one another, they are accelerated. The magnetic field has exerted a force on the objects causing them to gain kinetic energy (motion).

The nuclear forces are a bit harder to define in everyday terms, but they work the same way. They all can exert a force on an object, the object accelerates, and in accelerating, the object gains kinetic energy.

Once again, there is NO kinetic force. That phrase is meaningless in physics. There is kinetic energy which can be used to exert a force (by hitting something), and there are forces which can change an object's kinetic energy.

Hope that helps.

 

[Mongoose]

Actually they've been able to tie electomagnetism, the strong and the weak force together leaving two forces and, if Einstein was correct (and I suspect he was), gravity isn't even a force.

Ahh yes, I have heard about this, but it seemed to be a rather moot point for the discussion I was proposing. I decided to stick with the traditional four forces for it, since each of them has a different method of invoking kinetic energy.

To again attempt to answer the OP, you see some very clear examples of some of these forces producing motion every day. Obviously gravity exerts a force on an object causing it to accelerate. There is no "kinetic force" but when the force of gravity accelerates an object, the object's kinetic energy is increased.

Also with electromagnetic forces. When you put two like-poles of two magnets next to one another, they are accelerated. The magnetic field has exerted a force on the objects causing them to gain kinetic energy (motion).

The nuclear forces are a bit harder to define in everyday terms, but they work the same way. They all can exert a force on an object, the object accelerates, and in accelerating, the object gains kinetic energy.

Once again, there is NO kinetic force. That phrase is meaningless in physics. There is kinetic energy which can be used to exert a force (by hitting something), and there are forces which can change an object's kinetic energy.

Hope that helps.

Ahh, so kinetic energy is merely the ramification of the four fundamental forces. That should clear things up for me, then.