| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"stmx3" |
| Date: |
23 Oct 2003 12:07:57 PM |
| Object: |
POE: Equivalence of Frames or Mass? |
A quick question on the Principle of Equivalence:
Does it refer to the equivalence of
a) inertial and gravitational mass, or
b) inertial reference frames either accelerating or subject to a
uniform gravitational field?
I choose b and I think a follows from b. However, I've seen many
references on the web equating inertial mass with gravitational mass
and calling it P.O.E. Either they are dumbing it down or I am wrong.
-stmx3
.
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: POE: Equivalence of Frames or Mass? |
23 Oct 2003 02:11:19 PM |
|
|
stmx3 wrote:
A quick question on the Principle of Equivalence:
Does it refer to the equivalence of
a) inertial and gravitational mass, or
b) inertial reference frames either accelerating or subject to a
uniform gravitational field?
I choose b and I think a follows from b. However, I've seen many
references on the web equating inertial mass with gravitational mass
and calling it P.O.E. Either they are dumbing it down or I am wrong.
-stmx3
The Weak (Newtonian) Equivalence Principle states that gravitational
and inertial mass are fundamentally indistinguishable. In the weak
field approximation, all local test masses will then fall identically
in vacuum. The Strong (Einsteinian) and Very Strong EP extend
coverage, but are still wholly contingent upon the weak EP.
If you talk about reference frames (whether accelerated or not) rather
than local test masses, I would think you are properly in the strong
EP or better. This does not deny the fact that you need a coordinate
reference to locate your masses as they fall.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" The Net!
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
