Re: About frames moving at constant velocity with respect to inertial ones

On 9 ago, 17:59, Eric Gisse <jowr...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Aug 9, 2:00 pm, va...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:





On 9 ago, 16:08, Eric Gisse <jowr...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Aug 9, 12:55 pm, Shubee <e.Shu...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Aug 9, 11:51 am, Igor <thoov...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Aug 9, 1:49 pm, va...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

It is well-known that in Newtonian mechanics, a system moving with
constant velocity with respect to an inertial one can be proved also
inertial. Have we a similar assertion valid in Einstein's 1905
Relativity (1905R)? According to 1905R, a system moving with constant
velocity with respect to an inertial one can be proved also inertial?
If the answer is positive, I want to know who, when and where proved
it by first time. If those data are not available, I want then any
valid 1905 Relativity deduction of it.

Why would anyone need to prove it when it's simply true by definition?

What definition?

Shubeehttp://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity/special.pdf

The definition of "inertial frame".

You are suggesting that the definition of "inertial system" is "one
moving at constant velocity with respect to...an inertial system? A
little funny, isn't it?

Uh, no.

An inertial frame, by definition, is one moving with constant
velocity. If another frame is moving with constant velocity with
respect to /another/ frame moving with constant velocity, it shouldn't
come as a great shock that it too is an inertial frame.

If I need to expand on this further, you might want to consider not
posting in a physics newsgroup.

In any case, we are considering here Einstein's 1905 Relativity. Only
what Einstein wrote in 1905 is relevant here.

"We" are considering nothing. I will not indulge your obsession.

You don't remember that I am the one opening this thread? My topic is
Einstein's 1905 Relativity. Let me put it easy for you. If you are
analysing Galileo's physics, has sense to put in his mind an Einstein
or Maxwell idea? Is this so difficult to undersatand for you? I have
my reasons to address the 1905 epoch, but if you think that to analyse
the past has no sense at all, then simply don't participate. Any
person here is free to select in what to debate and with whom. If you
don't understand what is to analyse an old paper, this is your
problem.

RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)




RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)

- Ocultar texto de la cita -

- Mostrar texto de la cita -- Ocultar texto de la cita -

- Mostrar texto de la cita -- Ocultar texto de la cita -

- Mostrar texto de la cita -


.

Relevant Pages