Are frames in physics necessary?

  • Thread starter Thread starter pervect
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Frames Physics
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the necessity of frames in physics, particularly in the context of general relativity (GR). Some participants argue that modern physics can be conducted without explicitly referencing frames, emphasizing the importance of manifolds instead. However, others assert that frames remain crucial for practical calculations and understanding physical scenarios, especially in GR. The conversation highlights the lack of clear definitions for "frame of reference" in textbooks and the potential confusion arising from differing interpretations of the term. Ultimately, while mathematical structures like manifolds are foundational, the application of frames is essential for making physical predictions and conducting experiments.
  • #51
vanhees71 said:
I agree with you that there's no way to measure anything without the careful reference to a reference frame. Only the last sentence contradicts this obvious fact again. It must be "You can NOT have, e.g., clocks without having a frame of reference." Otherwise, please describe a clock which does not define a reference frame. I cannot even imagine something like this. Note that I talk about a real thing not a coordinate in the mathematical world!

You've discussed this extensively in various threads on the site, and I disagree. I don't think there is much to add to that discussion.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #52
No, this is utmost important. I'd like to understand how you define a clock without a frame!