Gravity & Inertia: Proportional to Mass?

  • Thread starter Thread starter deechan
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gravity Inertia
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between gravitational force, mass, and inertia. It questions how gravitational force can be proportional to mass if inertia opposes changes in a body's state. A participant points out a logical flaw in the initial reasoning, comparing it to measuring debt in currency. The conversation shifts to acknowledge that the principles of force, including F=ma, apply to various forces beyond gravity. The exchange concludes with a realization about the broader applicability of these concepts.
deechan
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
If force is something that changes the state of a body and inertia is opposition to change of state how can gravitational force be proportional to mass?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
deechan said:
If force is something that changes the state of a body and inertia is opposition to change of state how can gravitational force be proportional to mass?

Why can't it?

There's a fault in your logic here. It's as if you're asking "If having money is considered as wealth, then when I go in debt, why do they measure my debt in {insert currency here}?"

Furthermore, why restrict this to just gravitational force? Are you saying that you understand why F=ma is OK for other types of forces?

Zz.
 
Oh!I didn't think of other forces at all.I think I get it now.Thank you.
 

Thread 'Is calling fictitious forces "not real" just about terminology?'

Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
View full post »

Thread 'Derivation of Hamilton's Principle: Questions'

I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
View full post »

Similar threads

B Understanding Weight and Inertia: A Comparison of Mars and Earth
Replies
46
Views
4K
B Newton's Third Law in space
Replies
20
Views
2K
I Effects of External Torques on the Angular Momentum of Asymmetric Bodies
Replies
3
Views
2K
B How Much Mass Required to Demonstrate Gravity?
Replies
3
Views
1K
I Calculating Mass Inertia Product - Examples 1 & 2
Replies
2
Views
2K
I Moment of Inertia about an axis and Torque about a point
Replies
5
Views
3K
I Moment of inertia of human body with limbs at an angle
Replies
12
Views
2K
A thought I had about inertia, and derivatives of acceleration
Replies
1
Views
2K
B Why Is an Object's Weight Equal to the Force of Gravity It Experiences?
2
Replies
51
Views
4K
Why does mass/energy have inertia?
Replies
22
Views
3K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top