Gravitational & Inertial Mass: Why the Difference?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JasonRox
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The distinction between gravitational mass and inertial mass is significant despite their equivalence, as their equality requires explanation in classical physics. The discussion raises questions about the forces exerted on train cars moving at constant velocity, suggesting that all forces could be zero if friction is ignored. It posits that acceleration affects inertial mass but not gravitational mass, leading to considerations of how acceleration might influence the weight of objects, such as a gyroscope. The equivalence of inertial and gravitational mass is linked to Einstein's Principle of Equivalence, which is foundational to General Relativity. Overall, the conversation explores the complexities and implications of mass in physics.
JasonRox
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Messages
2,381
Reaction score
4
Why do we make such a careful distinction between gravitational mass and inertial mass, rather that talking about one mass only, since they are equivalent?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There is no apparent reason why they should be equal in classical physics. The fact that they are equal requires explanation.
 
This is a question in the book. Practice question so it's not worth marks. I personally thought they are different, and that gravitational mass is a direct result from inertial mass.

Is that right?

Another question... I've been pondering this one.

Let's say we have they train cars. They say that the first couplings have more force exerted on them than the last one.

If they are moving at a constant velocity, and we ignore friction, would they have all equal forces of 0.

According to Newton's Laws, they will continue on forever. If one had to snap, which is impossible, it would be impossible to predict on top of that.
 
I could be wrong about this, but I am under the impression that acceleration does not increase gravitational mass of the object, only it's inertial mass.
 
Think about a collsion between two charged objects compared to a collison between two objects with no charge.

Pallidin in relativity the inertial mass and the gravitational mass are one in the same.
 
jcsd said:
Think about a collsion between two charged objects compared to a collison between two objects with no charge.

Pallidin in relativity the inertial mass and the gravitational mass are one in the same.

So, the gravitational field coming from a given object is increased by acceleration? Thus, would a finely balanced, perimeter weighted gyroscope, having a rest weight of "x" actually weigh slightly more when accelerated?
 
The equivalence of inertial mass and gravitational mass is one form of Einstein's "Principle of Equivalence", which led to General Relativity.

Here's a nice discussion
http://www.pa.uky.edu/~cvj/as500_lec6/as500_lec6.html
http://instruct1.cit.cornell.edu/courses/astro101/lec24.htm
http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr162/lect/cosmology/equivalence.html

Here's a research group that tests the principle
http://www.npl.washington.edu/eotwash/index.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top