Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #567335
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics |
| Subject | Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion |
| Date | 2016-04-01 23:30 +0000 |
| Organization | The World : www.TheWorld.com : Since 1989 |
| Message-ID | <ndn0a8$6jb$2@pcls7.std.com> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <5778fdf7-4797-47f0-a538-8506f4d35651@googlegroups.com> <ndkc8i$s0q$2@pcls7.std.com> <3ccde0d0-8b1c-4715-9cc6-09e5c809a724@googlegroups.com> <ndmeq3$pfl$1@pcls7.std.com> <4e90545a-530b-409e-a54f-970ae9ec0b6a@googlegroups.com> |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: >On Friday, April 1, 2016 at 2:31:58 PM UTC-4, Michael Moroney wrote: >> kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: >> >> >Hey idiot moron-y.....in that case there is no inertial frame exists on >> >earth. Also every location in the ether fits your definition. That's why >> >SR and LET derived the same math. >> >> Of course there are inertial frames here. I can make them up as often as >> I want. There's one now! Whoops, there it goes, right through the floor! >That's why you are a moron=y. So it's true, you don't understand inertial frames at all. If I drop a box (in a vacuum), the inside of the box can be considered an inertial frame, as it is in freefall. An accelerometer inside it will read 0. No acceleration inside, and Newton's First Law holds. This is Einstein's elevator gedanken. Now I know you are about to whine "No, the box is accelerating! It is falling down!!!!" But that is how it is viewed from a NON-INERTIAL frame, someone standing on Earth. It is non-inertial because of gravity. An inertial frame will appear inertial only to a reference of another inertial frame. Think of it: If you are in a car accelerating away from a stationary object such as a lamp pole, you will measure it as accelerating away from you. But you (in the car) are accelerating, the pole is stationary. The box, as viewed from another INERTIAL frame (say, another falling box, with or without initial velocity in some direction) will see the first box in constant rectilinear motion relative to it, meeting the definition that all inertial frames will see each other in constant rectilinear motion. You really need to learn about inertial frames and SR before critizing either.
Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-03-27 06:23 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-03-27 13:51 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-03-27 23:07 +0200
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-03-27 17:13 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-03-31 14:51 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-04-04 12:23 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 14:33 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-04-04 13:40 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 13:45 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 15:52 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 13:43 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 15:47 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 15:53 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 20:16 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-06 14:10 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 13:32 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-03-27 17:11 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-03-31 15:00 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-03-31 23:35 +0000
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-01 06:13 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 08:48 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-01 14:44 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 18:03 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 18:08 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 18:14 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-02 06:23 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 08:34 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 05:39 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 07:50 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-02 18:56 +0000
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 05:56 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 08:22 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-05 14:30 +0000
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 09:07 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 07:16 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 11:12 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 13:38 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 15:45 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 14:35 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 13:35 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 15:55 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 18:17 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-01 18:31 +0000
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-01 14:46 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-01 23:30 +0000
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-02 06:13 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 08:38 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 07:56 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 05:44 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 08:26 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 07:13 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-05 14:02 +0000
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-06 13:55 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Virgil <VIRGIL@VIRGIL.com> - 2016-04-06 15:19 -0600
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-06 17:39 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-09 13:45 +0000
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-04-02 07:47 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-02 18:52 +0000
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 05:53 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 08:28 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-05 14:22 +0000
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-06 14:06 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-09 13:48 +0000
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 09:05 -0500
csiph-web