Inertial Frame of Reference: Is it an Ideal Concept?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ritwik06
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Frames Inertial
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of inertial frames of reference, questioning whether they are ideal constructs or if they can be said to "actually exist" in a practical sense. Participants explore the implications of gravitational effects and the applicability of Newtonian mechanics versus more complex theories like general relativity.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that an inertial frame can be considered to exist if no detectable deviations from the laws of physics are observed in experiments.
  • Others argue that the concept of "actually existing" reference frames is problematic, as reference frames are merely coordinate systems.
  • A participant questions if anything in the universe can be at absolute rest or moving with uniform velocity, suggesting that gravitational influences prevent this.
  • Another participant points out the contradiction in discussing the practical existence of inertial frames while acknowledging that Newtonian mechanics, which relies on these concepts, does not "actually exist" in a strict sense.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the existence of inertial frames, with no consensus reached on whether they can be considered real or merely ideal constructs. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of gravitational effects on the concept of inertial frames.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the limitations of defining inertial frames based on practical observations versus theoretical ideals, as well as the challenges posed by gravitational influences on absolute rest or uniform motion.

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 88 ·
3
Replies
88
Views
4K
  • · Replies 94 ·
4
Replies
94
Views
7K
  • · Replies 114 ·
4
Replies
114
Views
7K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
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
4K