Whats difference between Centripetal and Centrifugal force?

Sanny Going with "centriptal force" it is a force attracting a body
towards its center around which it revolves Going with "centrifugal
force" That is the inertial reaction of a body against a force
constraining it to move in a curve path. Much like holding a handle of a
bucket of water and swirling it over head upside down but not losing a
drop of water. Reality is water is not flat as it would be if just
sitting on the ground.Spinning gives it a concave curve) That told Mach
something and he came up with a very nice theory it goes like this.
"there is no such thing as centrifugal force." Like me Mach was very
clever,and thought things out O ya TreBert

On Apr 30, 4:40*pm, (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:
Sanny *Going with "centriptal force" it is a force attracting a body
towards its center around which it revolves *Going with "centrifugal
force" That is the inertial reaction of a body against a force
constraining it to move in a curve path. Much like holding a handle of a
bucket of water and swirling it over head upside down but not losing a
drop of water. Reality is water is not flat as it would be if just
sitting on the ground.Spinning gives it a concave curve) That told Mach
something and he came up with a very nice theory it goes like this.
"there is no such thing as centrifugal force." * Like me Mach was very
clever,and thought things out * O ya *TreBert

Either way, with our Selene/moon in orbit about Earth, when excluding
the mutual attraction force of gravity and instead using a tether,
either interpretation is offering essentially the same 2e20 N.m.s

~ BG

On Apr 30, 4:40*pm, (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:
Sanny *Going with "centriptal force" it is a force attracting a body
towards its center around which it revolves *Going with "centrifugal
force" That is the inertial reaction of a body against a force
constraining it to move in a curve path. Much like holding a handle of a
bucket of water and swirling it over head upside down but not losing a
drop of water. Reality is water is not flat as it would be if just
sitting on the ground.Spinning gives it a concave curve) That told Mach
something and he came up with a very nice theory it goes like this.
"there is no such thing as centrifugal force." * Like me Mach was very
clever,and thought things out * O ya *TreBert


Interestingly the water should be curved relartive to a line parallel
to the direction of motion, but flat relative to a line sideways to
the direction of motion. There must be a way to make a complicated
math problem out of this.

Double-A

Double A never had enough schooling to fit math in to much of my
thinking. I understand an equation. Here is a kicker. I can relate that
water curve to two pendulum clocks that have to end up swinging in
unison if they are sitting at the Earth's poles. go figure trebert
PS both have to obey "Mach's principle"