Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #374992 > unrolled thread

Car decelerates...

Started byJon Price <jonelwoodprice@gmail.com>
First post2016-01-27 19:42 -0800
Last post2016-01-28 09:46 -0700
Articles 6 on this page of 66 — 14 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity


Contents

  Car decelerates... Jon Price <jonelwoodprice@gmail.com> - 2016-01-27 19:42 -0800
    Re: Car decelerates... Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-01-28 04:44 +0100
      Re: Car decelerates... Jon Price <jonelwoodprice@gmail.com> - 2016-01-27 19:48 -0800
        Re: Car decelerates... Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-28 15:28 +1100
          Re: Car decelerates... mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-01-27 22:58 -0800
            Re: Car decelerates... Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-28 19:57 +1100
              Re: Car decelerates... mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-01-28 01:07 -0800
                Re: Car decelerates... Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-28 22:08 +1100
                  Re: Car decelerates... mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-01-28 03:51 -0800
                    Re: Car decelerates... Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-29 10:53 +1100
                      Re: Car decelerates... Jon Price <jonelwoodprice@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 19:31 -0800
                        Re: Car decelerates... Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 06:40 +0100
                          Re: Car decelerates... mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-01-28 22:29 -0800
                          Re: Car decelerates... Jon Price <jonelwoodprice@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 22:57 -0800
                            Re: Car decelerates... Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 08:08 +0100
                              Re: Car decelerates... Jon Price <jonelwoodprice@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 23:18 -0800
                                Re: Car decelerates... Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 08:24 +0100
                                Re: Car decelerates... rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 06:25 -0800
                                  Re: Car decelerates... Jon Price <jonelwoodprice@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 10:19 -0800
                                    Re: Car decelerates... Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 13:30 -0600
                                    Re: Car decelerates... rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 12:21 -0800
                                    Re: Car decelerates... Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 10:48 +0100
                                    Re: Car decelerates... Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 13:55 +0100
                                      Re: Car decelerates... Jon Price <jonelwoodprice@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 13:16 -0800
                              Re: Car decelerates... mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-01-29 00:35 -0800
                              Re: Car decelerates... Polikwaptiwa <polikw@polikwamail.org> - 2016-01-30 16:32 +0000
                                Re: Car decelerates... Jon Price <jonelwoodprice@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 18:02 -0800
                            Re: Car decelerates... Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 08:19 +0100
                              Re: Car decelerates... Jon Price <jonelwoodprice@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 23:23 -0800
                                Re: Car decelerates... Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 08:28 +0100
                                  Re: Car decelerates... Jon Price <jonelwoodprice@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 23:39 -0800
                                    Re: Car decelerates... Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 09:56 +0100
                                      Re: Car decelerates... Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 10:09 +0100
                                        Re: Car decelerates... Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-01-30 11:34 +0100
                            Re: Car decelerates... rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 06:20 -0800
                        Re: Car decelerates... Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-29 23:12 +1100
                          Re: Car decelerates... Juan Sebastián <jseb@montserrat.info> - 2016-01-29 12:33 +0000
                            Re: Car decelerates... Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-30 22:16 +1100
                              Re: Car decelerates... Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-01-30 12:25 +0100
                                Re: Car decelerates... Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-30 22:34 +1100
                                  Re: Car decelerates... Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-01-30 13:45 +0100
                          Re: Car decelerates... mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-01-29 04:42 -0800
                        Re: Car decelerates... rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 06:17 -0800
                          Re: Car decelerates... mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-01-29 06:23 -0800
                      Re: Car decelerates... Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-01-29 06:17 +0100
        Re: Car decelerates... Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-01-28 13:37 +0100
        Re: Car decelerates... moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-01-28 19:33 +0000
    Re: Car decelerates... rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-01-27 20:08 -0800
      Re: Car decelerates... Jon Price <jonelwoodprice@gmail.com> - 2016-01-27 20:28 -0800
        Re: Car decelerates... Jon Price <jonelwoodprice@gmail.com> - 2016-01-27 20:34 -0800
          Re: Car decelerates... rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-01-27 20:50 -0800
          Re: Car decelerates... mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-01-27 23:00 -0800
            Re: Car decelerates... Jon Price <jonelwoodprice@gmail.com> - 2016-01-27 23:34 -0800
              Re: Car decelerates... rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 07:23 -0800
              Re: Car decelerates... Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 09:59 -0600
                Re: Car decelerates... mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-01-28 22:27 -0800
              Re: Car decelerates... Juan Sebastián <jseb@montserrat.info> - 2016-01-28 16:49 +0000
              Re: Car decelerates... Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 22:29 +0100
        Re: Car decelerates... rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-01-27 20:53 -0800
        Re: Car decelerates... Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 07:47 +0100
          Re: Car decelerates... Juan Sebastián <jseb@montserrat.info> - 2016-01-28 18:22 +0000
            Re: Car decelerates... Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 22:31 +0100
    Re: Car decelerates... Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-01-27 23:59 -0800
      Re: Car decelerates... Jon Price <jonelwoodprice@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 00:19 -0800
    Re: Car decelerates... jamesl51165@gmail.com - 2016-01-28 08:18 -0800
    Re: Car decelerates... Mike Fontenot <mlfasf@comcast.net> - 2016-01-28 09:46 -0700

Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]


#375051

FromJuan Sebastián <jseb@montserrat.info>
Date2016-01-28 18:22 +0000
Message-ID<n8dm96$1mf4$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#375013
Poutnik wrote:

> To keep a body not accelerating in accelerating frame,
> the same force as the fictitious one but the opposite has act upon the
> body.

No shit, Sherlock.

> For the rotating accelerating frames like the natural Earth frame, there
> are 3 fictitious forces. 
> Centrifugal force, related to the body position.
> Coriolis force, related to the body velocity.( the most known )
> Euler force, related to acceleration of rotation, negligible for Earth.

Which one is not fictitious then? What a moron.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#375078

FromPoutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-28 22:31 +0100
Message-ID<n8e16k$hfc$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#375051
Dne 28/01/2016 v 19:22 Juan Sebastián napsal(a):
> Poutnik wrote:
> 
>> To keep a body not accelerating in accelerating frame,
>> the same force as the fictitious one but the opposite has act upon the
>> body.
> 
> No shit, Sherlock.
> 
>> For the rotating accelerating frames like the natural Earth frame, there
>> are 3 fictitious forces. 
>> Centrifugal force, related to the body position.
>> Coriolis force, related to the body velocity.( the most known )
>> Euler force, related to acceleration of rotation, negligible for Earth.
> 
> Which one is not fictitious then? What a moron.
> 
As you have to ask, you have obvioulsy no idea.

-- 
Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer )

Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#375025

FromKoobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-27 23:59 -0800
Message-ID<ef395c60-2437-43c6-852b-6ffedcfe25f6@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#374992
On Wednesday, January 27, 2016 at 7:42:47 PM UTC-8, Jon Price wrote:

> Drivers body moves forward. From cars reference frame, what causes
> forward body movement?

The inertial.  <shrug>

> A gravitational field?

No.  <shrug>

However, a balloon filled with helium which is lighter than air would move in the opposite direction.  The following channel did an episode for this phenomenon, but Koobee Wublee cannot find it now.  <shrug>

https://www.youtube.com/user/destinws2/videos

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#375026

FromJon Price <jonelwoodprice@gmail.com>
Date2016-01-28 00:19 -0800
Message-ID<bb74a19f-f947-4125-a6c0-4f6542056f5c@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#375025
Check my description of scenario in immediate previous post in this thread.
There is no inertia if consider scenario with cars reference frame at rest.

But I have heard of balloon example before. Balloon moves opposite way just like there is a gravitational field. (Balloon moves "up.") And driver moves "down." ?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#375039

Fromjamesl51165@gmail.com
Date2016-01-28 08:18 -0800
Message-ID<0fbcface-a16d-4066-9658-8ac899ea6891@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#374992
On Wednesday, January 27, 2016 at 7:42:47 PM UTC-8, Jon Price wrote:
> Drivers body moves forward.
> 
> From cars reference frame, what causes forward body movement?
> 
> A gravitational field?

Beyond the field there is a second gravity
this is weight opposite to change in speed.
We get a push forward from a slowdown.
It is gravity of "change in speed" for the atom.
Matter has its own form of G's by motion.

No.
The backward... Earth... ground moving underneath the car.

Mitchell Raemsch

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#375041

FromMike Fontenot <mlfasf@comcast.net>
Date2016-01-28 09:46 -0700
Message-ID<56AA45E1.7020002@comcast.net>
In reply to#374992
On 1/27/16 8:42 PM, Jon Price wrote:
> Drivers body moves forward.
>
>  From cars reference frame, what causes forward body movement?
>
> A gravitational field?
>

Using a frame of reference in which the observer, who's perspective is 
being given, is perpetually located at the spatial origin does NOT 
require that the observer consider himself to be unaccelerated. This 
same thing happens in the classic twin "paradox", at the (often assumed) 
instantaneous turnaround when the rocket-twin fires his rocket.  It is 
perfectly OK (and vastly simpler and less contorted) for the rocket-twin 
to contend that his rocket causes him to suddenly accelerate (and to 
essentially instantaneously change his velocity wrt the 
perpetually-inertial home-twin).  The alternate GR-equivalent 
explanation is that the rocket-twin contends that he is perpetually 
inertial, and that he uses his rocket only to counteract the sudden 
gravitational field that is somehow momentarily mysteriously switched on 
everywhere, and which causes everyone and everything ELSE to suddenly 
accelerate. Those other people FEEL no acceleration, because gravity 
works on each tiny piece of a person's body, and no internal stresses in 
their bodies are produced, because none of those pieces are acted on by 
any other force.  The rocket-twin DOES feel a force, from his rocket 
firing, because that force does NOT act directly on each of his body 
pieces, but only directly on a few of those pieces (like those pieces in 
contact with the seat of his spacecraft), thus producing internal 
stresses in his body.

As an explanation of the twin "paradox", the GR-equivalent explanation 
is clumsy, unnecessary, and needlessly confusing.  Its value was really 
only as a consistency check on the general relativity theory of 
gravitation (and on some of its early results), and as an illustration 
of the equivalence principle.

-- 
   https://sites.google.com/site/cadoequation/cado-reference-frame

   "Accelerated Observers in Special Relativity", PHYSICS ESSAYS, 
December 1999, p629.

   All you ever need to know about the twin "paradox".

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity


csiph-web