Inertial Frame of Reference: Is it an Ideal Concept?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ritwik06
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Frames Inertial
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the concept of inertial frames of reference, debating whether they exist as ideal constructs or have practical applicability. Participants argue that while no object can be considered absolutely non-accelerated due to gravitational influences, a reference frame can be deemed inertial if deviations from standard physical laws are undetectable in experiments. The conversation highlights the distinction between theoretical existence and practical utility, emphasizing that frameworks like Newtonian mechanics, while not "actually existing," are still used effectively in scientific applications.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of inertial frames of reference in physics
  • Familiarity with Newtonian mechanics
  • Basic knowledge of gravitational effects on motion
  • Concept of experimental observability in scientific measurements
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the implications of general relativity on inertial frames
  • Study the concept of non-inertial reference frames and their effects
  • Investigate the practical applications of Newtonian mechanics in engineering
  • Learn about the experimental methods used to detect deviations in physical laws
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, engineering students, and anyone interested in the foundational concepts of motion and reference frames in classical mechanics.

ritwik06
Messages
577
Reaction score
0
It is sometimes heard that inertial frame of reference does not actually exists and is only an ideal concept. What do you guys think?

Say, for example, An object is placed far away from all objects that can exert force on it. A reference frame is taken by taking the origin and axes fix in this. Will the frame be necessarily inertial?
I think yes. But I am not very confident.

Is anything in the universe absolutely non accelerated?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I would say that it depends on what it would mean for a reference frame (ineritial or not) to "actually exist". A reference frame is nothing more or less than a coordinate system, and as such I don't really know how the term "actually exists" would apply.

I would take a practical stance that (insofar as any reference frame can be said to "actually exist") a reference frame is actually inertial if no deviations from the standard form of the laws can be detected in the given experiment. If an effect is smaller than what is experimentally observable then it is fine to ignore.
 
DaleSpam said:
I would say that it depends on what it would mean for a reference frame (ineritial or not) to "actually exist". A reference frame is nothing more or less than a coordinate system, and as such I don't really know how the term "actually exists" would apply.

I would take a practical stance that (insofar as any reference frame can be said to "actually exist") a reference frame is actually inertial if no deviations from the standard form of the laws can be detected in the given experiment. If an effect is smaller than what is experimentally observable then it is fine to ignore.

"actually exist" meant in practical world.
Is anything at absolute rest or moving with uniform velocity?
And I am not talking to ignore those effects, however small they may be.
Is there any such inertial frame of reference?
 
ritwik06 said:
Is anything at absolute rest or moving with uniform velocity?

I would say no, just because the range of a bodies gravitational pull is infinite. so where ever this thing that is at rest is, it will accelerate slightly due to the acceleration of gravity.
 
ritwik06 said:
"actually exist" meant in practical world.
That's a bit of a contradiction. The practical world worries about what is practical. Newtonian mechanics does not "actually exist" and yet many scientists and engineers use Newtonian mechanics (a) because its "practical", (b) it is sufficiently accurate for the problem at hand, and (c) using a more accurate model is not warranted. For that matter, general relativity and quantum electrodynamics probably don't "actually" exist, either; we just don't know what's wrong with them yet.

The rest of your post veers far from this concept of the practical. You are talking about whether inertial frames exist theoretically given perfect measurements. Of course not. Then again, neither does Newtonian mechanics "actually exist".
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 94 ·
4
Replies
94
Views
7K
  • · Replies 114 ·
4
Replies
114
Views
5K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K