h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

You Nexus, huh? I design your eyes...

Sorry, couldn't resist. I see you're subbing my entry on Centrifugal Force. I thought I'd drop by and save you a few minutes work, since there's a link in this entry to the one on Coriolis Force. It'll need updating to point at the Edited version rather than my original, so you'll need the Edited Entry number, which is: A593273.

Also, I was pretty green with GuideML when I wrote this, and I think the words "A convenient fiction" belong in the title instead of big ugly bold letters as an intro. Just my opinion, see my personal version which I've changed slightly to see what I mean.

Hoping you have no further problems subbing, let me know if you do.

H

You got the reference, I'm impressed...

Right, I'll bear these points in mind when I'm subbing it, thanks.

If you have any more comments, suggestions, queries etc then please let me know.

Thanks!

Konrad, who subbed my entry on Coriolis force, gave me a look at the text just before he sent it back to the italics, when it was finished to his satisfaction. I'd appreciate it if you could do the same - I promise not to second guess the editing process (see the relevant conversation on my space for the exchanges...).

H

Hi. Just a quickie. A guy/gal/small FC. from AC. called "Jules" just got an entry recommended which explains frames of reference (inertial/rotating/accelerating etc.). Any chance of sticking a link to it somewhere? It would probably help and it would definitely be of interest to anyone reading this. I'd have written it myself if I knew enough. Check it out...

H

I'm hopping mad now. I said above Konrad gave me a look at the Coriolis force entry before it went off to the italics. It was fine, and I thought that was it. A line has now been added to that entry, presumably by an italic with no knowledge of physics, which is completely and utterly wrong.

I'd therefore emphasise, *please*, do ask me if you want to add something here, and please let me have a look at the entry *before* you send it in. Any pointless incorrect additions can then be accurately attributed.

Still seething and apologising for doing it near you...

H

I've calmed down considerably now - I caught the error the day before the entry went on the front page, and it was corrected before it was put there.

Anyway, just dropped by to suggest a couple more links: that inertial frames of reference entry has now been recommended, the Edited Entry number is A610714. Also, it's probably only good manners to link to the entry which inspired this one, which is "Gravity", Edited Entry number A565832. If you could jam in links to those I'm sure the entry will be improved.

Thanks...
H

I see you've been at work! A couple of observations:

1. In the section on throwing something hard, I think there should be some indication as to the sort of scale that's being talked about (i.e. about 50 metres in the first instance - across a pitch, 50 kilometres in the second - over the horizon, 5000 kilometres or more for orbit).

2. The reference to Gravity's Rainbow was just me being clever-clever really. If it deserves to be in at all, it's only worthy of a footnote, as it really is pretty obscure (it's a book by Thomas Pynchon and a song by Laurie Anderson featuring Peter Gabriel, off her album "Mr. Heartbreak").

As ever, feel free to ignore this totally, you're the sub-ed so you know the Guidelines better than I.


H.

Okay, I've made some more and hopefully final changes. Let me know what you think - I assume the link for roundabouts doesn't refer to precisely what you had in mind? However, I figured that one experiences what is commonly referred to as 'centrifugal force' on both kinds (ie if a car corners on a roundabout fast enough, it feels as if the occupants are being thrown outwards etc).

Please let me know if this is okay before I send it to the editors.

Great stuff, only two tiny things to say:

1. I think it would be a bit more "layman friendly" to put the link to inertial frames of reference at the first mention, in the first line of the paragraph headed "Rotating Frames of Reference", rather than at the end.

2. After the words "really, really hard" in the brackets it would be better to say something like "a distance of over 5000km", mainly because I have no idea whether that's a realistic orbital trajectory (I suspect not). But "over 5000km" should satisfy the pedants.

Other than those two trivial points: excellent job, and top link to the roundabouts. You're right, it hadn't occurred to me but it's a good example. Thanks again for letting me have a look before it goes back!


H.

Done and done. I'll throw this fella back to the editors now.