Re: Spinoza, Einstein and Paradoxes


"Sue..." <suzysewnshow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1170262391.866195.244740@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jan 31, 10:58 am, "harry" <harald.vanlintelButNotT...@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
"Sue..." <suzysewns...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1170250096.823194.16310@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx





On Jan 31, 7:34 am, "harry" <harald.vanlintelButNotT...@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
"Sue..." <suzysewns...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1170234677.277582.269340@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Jan 31, 3:24 am, BernardZ <berna...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <1170215267.502772.187...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
x...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx says...

xxein: There is only one vantage point. The universe (and/or/if
beyond) exists. To assume anything more is to invent reason
based
on
nothing more than a wish.

There can be more then one vantage point, one observer sees a ball
coming towards him another sees if flying away from him.

The ball, from virtually one point in space.
sees two ~observers~ pulling fore and aft
and a matter filled universe pulling in all directions.
(~matter there influences inertia here, Mach)

According to Mach, matter *makes* inertia. However, no correctly
working
model could be made based on his hypothesis.

<< Mach's stipulation is favoured in general relativity by the
circumstance that acceleration induction in accordance with
the gravitational field equations really exists, although of
such slight intensity that direct detection
by mechanical experiments is out of the question. >>
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1921/einstein-le...

<< Small acceleration sensors placed at different locations
close to the spinning superconductor, which has to be accelerated
for the effect to be noticeable, recorded an acceleration field
outside the superconductor that appears to be produced by
gravitomagnetism. >>
http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/GSP/SEM0L6OVGJE_0.html

Sue...

Sure. Now please explain how Mach's hypothesis correctly predicts the
inertia of a spacecraft as function of the distance to the sun.

The celestial bodies pull the spacecraft in all directions
with an induction force. The sun distorts that isotropy
so there is a net force toward the sun.

Sue...

I asked about inertia (such as in F=m*dv/dt). According to Mach, this is
caused by the celestial bodies and must thus be expressible as a function of
the distance to them (except in astrology).

Cheers,
Harald


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Spinoza, Einstein and Paradoxes
    ... for the effect to be noticeable, recorded an acceleration field ... inertia of a spacecraft as function of the distance to the sun. ... That would be a meaningless expression. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Spinoza, Einstein and Paradoxes
    ... for the effect to be noticeable, recorded an acceleration field ... inertia of a spacecraft as function of the distance to the sun. ... The celestial bodies pull the spacecraft in all directions ... with an induction force. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: A Physics Lesson for the Contributors to this NG
    ... the angular momentum vector of the two masses. ... The 'inward' acceleration is on m is -w^2r and on M, ... a modification of the law of inertia in the sense that the ... fictitious 'outward force' in the rotating frame automatically eliminates the ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Space travel with lasers
    ... >> With all the stations within the orbit of Mars, ... The probe is accelerated in the circle, ... The acceleration towards the Sun needed ... If you can maintain that acceleration, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Space travel with lasers
    ... >> With all the stations within the orbit of Mars, ... The probe is accelerated in the circle, ... The acceleration towards the Sun needed ... If you can maintain that acceleration, ...
    (sci.astro)