Abstract
I HAVE to thank the Editor for his courtesy in allowing me to see Mr. Muirhead's interesting letter. I quite agree that the meaning attached to the word “stress” by eminent writers during the fifty years from the time of Rankine to the present day has varied. At the same time, I observe that the only two definitions of the “measure of stress” which are quoted are of recent date, and both state clearly that a stress is measured by the force per unit area, though I find this same definition in Thomson and Tait, 1867 edition, Art. 661, a few lines below the quotation given by Mr. Muirhead. I think, then, I may claim sufficient authority for my statement, “Strictly a stress is measured by the force applied per unit of area,” and for the doubt which I expressed as to the desirability of introducing the word “stress” as practically synonymous with “force” in a discussion of Newton's second law of motion.
Similar content being viewed by others
Article PDF
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
REVIEWER Stress—Its Definition. Nature 64, 207 (1901). https://doi.org/10.1038/064207b0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/064207b0
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.