Is inertia the total gravitational forces of the Universe?

[Ian Walker]

Hi all

I read a question on this subject from some time ago but was not satisfied with the clarity of the answer and in the light of recent experimental results I wish to clarify my understanding of this ancient scientific question.

What is the cause of Inertia?

So is inertia simply the total gravitational forces from from every object with mass in the universe?

Gravity as I understand is the weakest force but the one for which the range is longest eg we can feel the gravitational forces beyond which we can see objects with visual or radio telescopes.

Is it more accurate to say the gravitational force attenuates more slowly at distance?

Kind Regards Ian Walker

 

[FactChecker]

Keep in mind that the gravitational force on an object can change dramatically without any change in the object's inertia. So if there is a connection, it is very hard to see. I don't think that you can make that connection between the two.

 

[Ian Walker]

Keep in mind that the gravitational force on an object can change dramatically without any change in the object's inertia. So if there is a connection, it is very hard to see. I don't think that you can make that connection between the two.

Hi all

In reply to FactChecker,

With the Universe as the Frame of reference?

Kind Regards Ian Walker

 

[Nugatory]

With the Universe as the Frame of reference?

The universe isn't a frame of reference. Where would you put the origin of the coordinate system?

 

[russ_watters]

With the Universe as the Frame of reference?

I'm sorry, but that doesn't make any sense and implies something untrue. Inertia works the same regardless of frame of reference.

The idea of equating gravitational force and inertia doesn't make much sense because (among other reasons) the units are different. Thats because they are very different concepts.

 

[FactChecker]

It may be that the effects of the mass of all objects in the universe cause distortions in the space-time geodesics and that those define an inertial path "straight line". But I don't think that you can say that the definition of a straight line is the same as the definition of inertia.

The universe has straight lines that are the same for any amount of mass. So it can not explain the difference in inertia between a small mass and a large mass.

 

[JakeRussell]

I understand your question, but it is inherently flawed.

Inertia is not a force in and of itself. Inertia is simply the universe's version of path of least resistance. Ultimately, it takes more energy to speed up (or slow down) an object in motion than it does for the object in motion to continue on its way. Inertia is not a force. Inertia is the combined amount of force that has already been applied, and can be thought of as potential energy, an equal but opposite amount of which would be required to stop the object in motion.

Basically, it's easier for something to "not change" whatever it is doing, be it resting or moving. The universe is way lazier than people. WAAAAAAY lazier.