Why does Newtonian mechanics include relative motion between inertial frames?

AI Thread Summary
In Newtonian mechanics, inertial frames of reference are defined as those that move relative to each other, emphasizing the absence of an absolute reference frame. This leads to the conclusion that while there is no single absolute frame, there are infinitely many valid inertial frames. Each frame can be used to describe motion consistently, but when transitioning to non-inertial frames, fictitious forces must be accounted for. The concept of relative motion is fundamental to understanding Newtonian mechanics. Thus, the framework allows for a comprehensive analysis of motion without relying on an absolute reference point.
am2010
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
I know that in Newtonian mechanics an inertial frame of reference moves relative to absolute space. But why does Newtonian mechanics include the contention that two inertial reference frames move relative to each other?

It seems that if you have an absolute reference frame then there is no need for reference frames that can also move relative to one another.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There is no absolute frame in Newtonian Physics. There are infinitely many inertial frames. They are all good choices. Furthermore, Newtonian Physics does provide you with ways of working in non-inertial frames, but fictitious forces must then be included.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...

Similar threads

Back
Top