- #1
- 1,231
- 513
I have a 3-pack of related relativity musings I was hoping someone(s) could enlighten me on:
1) Since the reach of gravity is infinite and the universe is homogeneous and isotropic with regards to the distribution of matter, is it fair to say that no object, even those in deep interstellar or intergalactic space, is truly in an inertial reference frame? It would seem as if every object would always be accelerating all the time to some sort of degree, and thus always be in a non-inertial frame.
2) The only thing we know has a constant velocity is light. Could we consider light (photons) to be in an inertial frame, or is the fact that it is massless, etc. put it in a special category so we don't think of light as defining an inertial frame?
3) If I put an accelerometer on my kitchen table, would it read 9.8 m/s^2? Which direction would it read that it was accelerating in, up or down?
Thanks in advance for your consideration
1) Since the reach of gravity is infinite and the universe is homogeneous and isotropic with regards to the distribution of matter, is it fair to say that no object, even those in deep interstellar or intergalactic space, is truly in an inertial reference frame? It would seem as if every object would always be accelerating all the time to some sort of degree, and thus always be in a non-inertial frame.
2) The only thing we know has a constant velocity is light. Could we consider light (photons) to be in an inertial frame, or is the fact that it is massless, etc. put it in a special category so we don't think of light as defining an inertial frame?
3) If I put an accelerometer on my kitchen table, would it read 9.8 m/s^2? Which direction would it read that it was accelerating in, up or down?
Thanks in advance for your consideration
