About us
Science Blog was started in August 2002. It lives, breathes and eats press releases from research organizations around the globe. Most of what you read here are press releases from the outfits named in the stories themselves. Got a news story you think belongs here?
Let's talk.
The other half of the equation is
blog posts from readers like you. So if you have an interest in science,
please register and join others like you in an ongoing, vibrant dialog about what makes the world tick. Meantime, please take a minute to read our
Privacy Policy and Site Disclaimer.
Fred,
I’m so glad you came back! If only temporarily –
The issue seems quite simple, and yet, astoundingly, I’ve yet to find a physicist who will step out of the paradigm to address it, much less critique in directly. You see like a reasonable person, I have an abiding faith in reason, and so I continue to hope that you’ll address my point:
Not only is there a way to distinguish between an inertial acceleration and gravitation, the two are entirely distinct. Gravitation is only involved with inertial acceleration when it is resisted.
“ an accelerated frame of reference or the presence of gravity yield the same result, and there is no way to distinguish between them.â€
First, I showed that there is a way to distinguish them: Objects dropped in the situation where gravitation is involved will converge (see Eotvas). Second, unobstructed gravitation manifests no inertial acceleration whatever. I welcome an example that violates this NON-EQUIVALENCE principle. The “equivalence principle†only shows that the inertial acceleration that occurs when gravitation is obstructed resembles (in some ways – again, see Eotvas) the inertial acceleration that occurs when force is applied.
If the non-equivalence principle (gravitation is only coincident with inertial acceleration when gravitation is resisted) can’t be refuted, if the equivalence principle confounds inertial acceleration and gravitation when they coincide, doesn’t that give pause?
Don, I’ve read Einstein’s various statements of the equivalence principle. He’s a worthy authority, but authority isn’t supposed to carry weight in physics. The equivalence principle only demonstrates a limited equivalence of inertial accelerations, with and without the involvement of gravitation. To the extent that there’s an equivalence, there’s an equivalence of inertial acceleration with inertial acceleration.
Fred, per your last comment, the equivalence of gravitational mass and inertial mass is to be expected, as it's the same mass that is whether accelerated by force or prevented from gravitating by force.