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

Groups > sci.physics > #548395

Re: inertial frames of reference

From Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Newsgroups sci.physics
Subject Re: inertial frames of reference
Date 2016-01-26 15:32 -0600
Organization Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID <n88olj$gso$3@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References (8 earlier) <c9538e9c-0724-44f3-8ffe-31c65bbe99ba@googlegroups.com> <n85tcv$1qco$1@gioia.aioe.org> <47423c1f-b2f3-4f9d-b4f2-17c597eb2391@googlegroups.com> <n87s4b$q9i$1@gioia.aioe.org> <ae63d4ee-b0b0-4645-b8dc-87714ac26765@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 1/26/2016 12:54 PM, jay moseley wrote:
> Odd wrote...
>> In a non-inertial, rotating reference frame, the ball is stationary and so APPEARS
>> to be in equilibrium (no acceleration). But there is no source of a force >outward,
>> only instead the force due to the string, and so there is an unbalanced force and
>> yet the appearance of equilibrium. This is a violation of Newton's >first law (or
>> if you like, conservation of momentum). This is the hallmark of non-inertial frames,
>> that conservation of momentum does not hold.
>
> Considering rotating or noninertial frames are commonplace if not the only
> possible frame (all observable frames rotate. Earth rotates on axis, sun around
> galaxy core etc)... then Newtons law of conservation of momentum cannot
> explain forces in most if not all frames of reference.

Conservation of momentum is not intended to "explain forces". The 
explanation of forces comes from something else.

>
>>> And if it is called a fictitious force why mention it? > Obviously the force isnt fictitous..
>
>> Sure, it's fictitious. Unless you can point to the source of that force -- what physical
>> entity is pulling outward on the ball? -- then it is fictitious.
>
> As I mentioned earlier the gravitational force of the rest of the universe. Its  there, we
> see it in action on cosmological scales directing flows of galaxy groupings ( great attractor
> is the name I think). And it defines the largest  structures observable, the filament
> structure of galaxy growth. So why not local effects like centrifugal forces in
> non inertial frames?

Well, for one, the clumping of galaxy groupings is independent of 
reference frame. Which is what you'd expect for a physical cause -- that 
the effect shows up independent of reference frame.

Note that centrifugal forces and coriolis forces are NOT independent of 
reference frame. That's how you know they're not due to some physical agent.

>
>> Take this example. Attach a weighing scale at the end of the string to see if the > ball pulls
>> at the scale. Now according to you, there is no force pulling at the ball.
>
>> There is no OUTWARD force pulling on the ball. There is clearly an INWARD force pulling on the
>> ball, due to the string (or, once you insert the scale, the > >spring scale is pulling inward
>> on the ball). But that force is unbalanced, as there is no outward force pulling on the ball.
>
> I havent done the experiment myself but I dispute this point. My
> bet is that the ball stretches the scale outwards in the string frame.

It does, but that's a force on the scale, not a force on the ball. There 
is nothing you can point to that is pulling outward on the BALL. Don't 
confuse those two.

> (Im thinking one of HVAC's fish scales where the fish pulls the spring
> outwards from the scale. Not the scale pulling the fish upwards to weigh
> it.)
>



-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-20 11:31 -0800
  Re: inertial frames of reference Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 13:40 -0600
    Re: inertial frames of reference "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 13:32 -0800
      Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-20 14:14 -0800
    Re: inertial frames of reference jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-21 05:10 +0000
      Re: inertial frames of reference Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-01-23 10:58 -0600
        Re: inertial frames of reference jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-01-23 19:01 +0000
          Re: inertial frames of reference Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-01-23 13:10 -0600
  Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 16:25 -0600
    Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-20 19:47 -0800
      Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-21 05:37 -0800
      Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 08:28 -0600
        Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-21 06:57 -0800
          Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 09:15 -0600
            Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-21 07:48 -0800
              Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-22 19:20 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-01-23 14:43 +1100
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-23 12:11 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-23 13:15 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-24 04:48 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 08:33 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 01:57 -0500
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-25 05:32 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 10:56 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 06:34 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 14:13 -0500
                Re: inertial frames of reference HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 08:33 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 01:58 -0500
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 10:09 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-25 09:56 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 13:29 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 09:25 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-25 09:48 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 11:55 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-25 14:57 -0800
        Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-24 16:03 -0800
          Re: inertial frames of reference Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 18:32 -0600
            Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-25 00:50 -0800
              Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 10:52 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-25 11:20 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 13:34 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-25 15:41 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 07:25 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-26 10:54 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 15:32 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-27 03:15 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-27 10:18 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-27 12:52 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-27 15:51 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-27 14:09 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-27 16:23 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-28 05:26 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 09:10 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-28 10:01 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 13:14 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-28 13:02 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 16:30 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-28 15:06 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 17:15 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-28 18:00 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-29 04:47 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 08:19 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 07:54 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-29 06:44 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 08:53 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 07:07 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-29 07:24 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-29 07:45 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 10:32 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 08:50 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 12:50 -0500
                Re: Ben Jacoby hates the truth because it convicts him. benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 14:01 -0500
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 13:27 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 10:52 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-29 09:33 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 12:11 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 12:59 -0500
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 10:08 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 12:39 -0500
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 12:16 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 14:06 -0500
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 14:40 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 04:56 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 04:56 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-27 17:56 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-27 18:57 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-28 05:43 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 09:13 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 09:19 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-28 14:47 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 16:52 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 17:10 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-29 01:13 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 08:16 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-29 09:26 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 12:05 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-29 10:52 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 14:31 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-30 07:37 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 13:58 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-01 03:05 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-01 09:40 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-29 09:34 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 12:14 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-29 10:58 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 14:39 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-30 07:43 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 14:01 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-01-29 14:12 -0500
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 08:59 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-28 09:03 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-28 11:40 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-01-30 11:36 -0800
          Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 10:44 -0600
  Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-23 05:19 -0800
    Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-23 06:10 -0800
  Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-29 10:06 -0800
  Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-31 07:23 -0800
    Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-31 08:53 -0800
      Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-31 11:54 -0800
        Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 14:04 -0600
          Re: inertial frames of reference xxein1@att.net - 2016-01-31 15:01 -0800
            Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 19:07 -0600
      Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 13:54 -0600
        Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-31 15:04 -0800
          Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-01 03:37 -0800
            Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-01 04:18 -0800
              Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-01 04:26 -0800
              Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-01 09:52 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-01 08:34 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-01 10:40 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-01 12:55 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-01 13:55 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-01 16:38 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-02 07:19 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-02 09:53 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-02 12:55 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-01 16:27 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-02 01:39 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-02 05:49 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference jay moseley <jaymoseley@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-02 10:49 -0800
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-02 13:20 -0600
                Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-02 09:43 -0600
            Re: inertial frames of reference "kquirici@yahoo.com" <kquirici@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-01 04:20 -0800
              Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-01 09:55 -0600
            Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-01 09:43 -0600
    Re: inertial frames of reference Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 13:51 -0600

csiph-web