Register to reply

How inertial frame of reference differs from non-inertial frame..?

by aditya23456
Tags: differs, frame, inertial, noninertial, reference
Share this thread:
aditya23456
#1
Apr20-12, 06:00 AM
P: 111
We know that we can't say whether we are at rest or uniformly moving if we're in a einstein cage..but if the same medium is accelerating/decelerating can we being inside(and can't see outside) claim abt state of cage..?I ve read that a non-inertial can be converted to inertial by incorporating a fictious force..?? Does this fictious force has any orgin.If yes,where this origin disappears when cage stops accelerating.?If there are 2 bodies inside a cage which is accelerating uniformly,does 1 body see other body in rest..?
Phys.Org News Partner Science news on Phys.org
Security CTO to detail Android Fake ID flaw at Black Hat
Huge waves measured for first time in Arctic Ocean
Mysterious molecules in space
DaleSpam
#2
Apr20-12, 06:29 AM
Mentor
P: 16,985
You can tell if your cage is inertial or not simply by using an accelerometer comoving with the cage. If it reads 0 then the cage is inertial.
aditya23456
#3
Apr20-12, 06:46 AM
P: 111
well..I remember a example stating why non-inertial frames can be recognised being inside.When the person inside a cage tosses a coin,if the coin falls back in this hand then he's in inertial frame else if it falls right ahead of him or behind he's in decelerating or accelerating frame..but why does this phenomenon occur,why can't the coin in same way as inertial frame fall back into his hand by consuming the acceleration in the air also while tossed

DaleSpam
#4
Apr20-12, 06:59 AM
Mentor
P: 16,985
How inertial frame of reference differs from non-inertial frame..?

If the cage is inertial then the coin won't fall back into his hand, it will continue to move in a straight line at a constant speed. That is Newtons first law.
HallsofIvy
#5
Apr20-12, 07:05 AM
Math
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
Thanks
PF Gold
P: 39,348
That is assuming no external forces. Am I in an "inertial coordinate system" sitting here in front of my computer? If I were to toss a coin in the air, it would come back to my hand!
aditya23456
#6
Apr20-12, 07:45 AM
P: 111
Any body inside a inertial frame is a source of non-inertiality because the body is held intact by forces..does that mean there's NO INERTIAL FRAME in known physical applications.?
A.T.
#7
Apr20-12, 08:52 AM
P: 3,916
Quote Quote by HallsofIvy View Post
Am I in an "inertial coordinate system" sitting here in front of my computer?
According to GR, no.
Quote Quote by HallsofIvy View Post
If I were to toss a coin in the air, it would come back to my hand!
Because your frame is non-inertial.
DaleSpam
#8
Apr20-12, 09:50 AM
Mentor
P: 16,985
Quote Quote by aditya23456 View Post
Any body inside a inertial frame is a source of non-inertiality because the body is held intact by forces..does that mean there's NO INERTIAL FRAME in known physical applications.?
As long as the net real force is zero an object may be subject to multiple external forces and still be inertial. Similarly with the various sub-parts of an extended body.
HallsofIvy
#9
Apr20-12, 01:16 PM
Math
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
Thanks
PF Gold
P: 39,348
Ah. So a room stationary on the surface of the earth is "non-inertial" and a room falling with non-zero accleration due to gravity is "inertial".
DrGreg
#10
Apr20-12, 02:03 PM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
DrGreg's Avatar
P: 1,843
Quote Quote by HallsofIvy View Post
Ah. So a room stationary on the surface of the earth is "non-inertial" and a room falling with non-zero acceleration due to gravity is "inertial".
Yes, although to be precise and avoid ambiguity it would be better to say "non-zero acceleration relative to the Earth's surface". A free-falling room has zero "proper acceleration" i.e. acceleration relative to a local inertial observer.
A.T.
#11
Apr20-12, 02:03 PM
P: 3,916
Quote Quote by HallsofIvy View Post
Ah. So a room stationary on the surface of the earth is "non-inertial" and a room falling with non-zero accleration due to gravity is "inertial".
Yes. In GR gravity is an inertial force which appears only in non-inertial frames. An answer to the OPs question valid for both: Newton and GR is:

Inertial frames are those where all inertial forces disappear (all Newtons Laws hold).

The difference is only the classification of gravity as a interaction or inertial force respectively.
Matterwave
#12
Apr20-12, 03:59 PM
Sci Advisor
Matterwave's Avatar
P: 2,709
The coin trick has to assume that the coin is not charged, or that there is no external electro-magnetic field (or both). Only gravity gets to modify what you call "inertial" or not.
aditya23456
#13
Apr27-12, 10:49 PM
P: 111
My question is still not answered completely.! Whats use of fictious force in this context..and how to convert a non-inertial frame to inertial frame.and does a body appear stationary when watched by a object in its accelerating frame.
yuiop
#14
Apr27-12, 11:14 PM
P: 3,967
Quote Quote by aditya23456 View Post
My question is still not answered completely.! Whats use of fictious force in this context..and how to convert a non-inertial frame to inertial frame.and does a body appear stationary when watched by a object in its accelerating frame.
You cannot convert a non inertial frame to an inertial frame. The proper force experienced in a non inertial frame cannot be transformed away. We can sometimes use the concept of an "instantaneous co-moving inertial reference frame" to study non inertial frames. For example let us say we have a rocket accelerating with a constant proper acceleration of one g. In an initial reference frame S, the velocity of the rocket is zero. At a later time the rocket is momentarily at rest in inertial reference frame S' which is moving at 0.6c relative to S. At an even later time the rocket is momentarily at rest in an inertial reference frame S'' moving at 0.8c relative to S and so on. In inertial reference frames, S, S' and S'' the rocket is always measured to have an acceleration of g when the rocket is momentarily at rest, but in frame S for example, the initial acceleration is g but progressively the acceleration gets slower as the velocity of the rocket increases relative to S.

Now if we have object accelerating with constant proper acceleration then there exists a non inertial reference frame, in which the object will appear stationary. If we have an inertial object that is accelerating from the point of view of a non inertial reference frame, then there is also exists an inertial reference frame in which the object appears to be stationary. This is trivially obvious. However, if we have a non inertial object experiencing proper acceleration, then there is no inertial reference frame where the object appears stationary for more than an instant. Conversely, if we have a inertial object with coordinate acceleration as measured in a non inertial reference frame, then there is no non inertial reference frame where the object appears stationary for more than an instant.
DrGreg
#15
Apr28-12, 10:50 AM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
DrGreg's Avatar
P: 1,843
The concept of "fictitious force" arises in Newtonian (non-relativistic) physics. For example, relative to a rotating frame of reference, Newton's 2nd law F=ma=dp/dt doesn't work, but we can make it work by adding in a centrifugal "force" and a coriolis "force". Because these forces don't exist in an inertial frame, these forces are usually described as "fictitious forces".

In relativity this is taken account of by the difference between a coordinate derivative and a covariant derivative. Newton's law in a non-inertial frame becomes[tex]
F^\alpha = \frac{\mbox{D} P^\alpha}{\mbox{D} \tau} = \frac{\mbox{d} P^\alpha}{\mbox{d} \tau} + \Gamma^\alpha_{\beta\gamma} U^\beta P^\gamma
[/tex]The term involving [itex]\Gamma^\alpha_{\beta\gamma}[/itex] is the "fictitious force" term and becomes zero in an inertial frame.

In general relativity, gravity becomes a fictitious force. A free-falling inertial observer feels no force of gravity. An observer on the Earth's surface is experiencing a proper acceleration upwards and zero acceleration relative to the Earth. The fictitious weight of the observer makes Newton's Law work relative to the Earth's surface.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Inertial and non-inertial frame of reference Introductory Physics Homework 3
Major difference of Inertial and non-inertial frame of reference ? Special & General Relativity 3
Inertial frame of Reference? General Physics 14
Is a reference frame fixed to a photon an Inertial Frame? Special & General Relativity 3
Inertial reference frame General Physics 4