# Tag Info

0

The short answer: Inertial forces don't obey Newton's third law. There are no inertial forces in an inertial frame of reference, and that's where Newton's third law applies. Consider two observers of some events. One of the observers is inertial, the other is rotating at a nonzero rate with respect to the first. Suppose the inertial observer sees an object ...

0

The cutest way to see this is to restate Newton's third law as "no interaction change the total momentum of the universe." Then, note that since an accelerating reference frame is accelerating with respect to whatever "base" inertial reference frame you're using, everything else seems to be accelerating away. Therefore, the net momentum of the universe is ...

1

I'll frame my answer in terms of a comment by the original poster, because that comment asks the question most succinctly: Please tell me any one inertial frame so that I can decide which frame is inertial and which is not. Good question! I'll start my answer from a Newtonian perspective and assume that a (possibly unknowable) Newtonian inertial frame ...

0

Make it clear all frames are relative in the sense that the frame that is inertial to you is non-inertial to another observer. Suppose you are at rest on the ground and thus you are at inertial frame of reference;however an alien outside earth will observe you rotating along earth around its axis thus you,according to the alien,are in non-inertial frame . ...

-1

Even if the answers from CuriousOne, Terry Bollinger, Mr.WorshipMe are correct, the historical answer is not yet given. For instance, the invariance of the speed of light was not a problem, since this concept was not known before Einstein... who introduced it to define simultaneity ! As referred to the original Einstein's paper, the motivation for the ...

-1

. . . . $$To \enspace begin,\qquad L^2=L'^2+b^2\qquad \qquad and\qquad \qquad c^2=a^2+v^2 \qquad$$ $$Thus\qquad L'^2/L^2+b^2/L'^2=1\qquad and\qquad a^2/c^2+v^2/c^2=1$$ $$\enspace \qquad \qquad And\enspace \qquad \qquad x^o=y^o, \qquad \qquad Thus\enspace \quad L'^2/L^2+v^2/c^2=1 \qquad \qquad$$ \rightarrow \quad L'^2/L^2=1-v^2/c^2\quad \rightarrow ...

7

In at least one history I've read about Einstein's early life -- sorry, I don't recall the name of the book -- the author claimed that even back when Einstein was in Gymnasium (high school), he pondered a simple thought experiment: What would an electromagnetic wave look like if one traveled along beside it at the speed of light? The answer from ...

15

There was no problem with electromagnetism. The problem was that Maxwell's equations are invariant under Lorentz transformations but are not invariant under Galileo transformations whereas the equations of classical mechanics can be easily made invariant under Galileo transformations. The question was: how to reconcile both in a universe in which Maxwell's ...

4

Maxwell's equations of electromagnetism predicted that light would travel with a constant velocity c. The question is - a velocity c with respect to what? It was thus supposed that it must be with respect to an ether which was at absolute rest in the universe. It then followed from the Galilean transformation that absolute uniform motion with respect to ...

1

I've heard that inertial frames are frames in which Newton's laws hold. The modern view of Newton's first law is that it defines the concept of an inertial frame. It also, at least conceptually, provides a mechanism for testing whether a frame of reference is an inertial frame. Suppose you know that no forces act on some particle. If that particle ...

1

1)Definition: An inertial frame of reference is a frame of reference where Newton's first law applies (uniform motion if without external force). Now if we have other frame of references that are moving relative to this inertial frame with uniform relative velocities, then all the others are also called inertial frame of references. 2)Transformation between ...

Top 50 recent answers are included