- 295

- 0

It occurred to me that, as far as calculating the position or movement of objects a reference frame can be rotational, see the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotating_reference_frame" [Broken]. So instead of seeing the Earth as orbiting the sun you could say that the Earth is stationary and the rest of the universe is rotating around an axis going through the sun and perpendictular to the plane of the Earth's orbit. (I feel dizzy…)

Of course, this results in all sorts of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fictitious_force" [Broken]. It also seems notable to me that this will also mean that non-rotating objects a certain distance from the axis will appear to be moving faster than c. And accelerating at a ridiculous rate, of course.

I was wondering if anything interesting is derived from the fact that any object can be construed as rotating at any rate by selecting a different rotational reference frame. And also if anything interesting happens as the speed of rotation approaches the speed of light with respect to a non-rotating reference frame. (Not physically possible with any known material, of course, but you get what I mean.)

It seems that this relativity of rotation can't be "real" in that there's only one reference frame where conservation of momentum, conservation of energy, etc. aren't violated. (Or is there a Lorentz-transformation-like way of correcting for that?) So does that mean that even though the universe doesn't have a "here" and a "there" (i.e. no absolute

Of course, this results in all sorts of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fictitious_force" [Broken]. It also seems notable to me that this will also mean that non-rotating objects a certain distance from the axis will appear to be moving faster than c. And accelerating at a ridiculous rate, of course.

I was wondering if anything interesting is derived from the fact that any object can be construed as rotating at any rate by selecting a different rotational reference frame. And also if anything interesting happens as the speed of rotation approaches the speed of light with respect to a non-rotating reference frame. (Not physically possible with any known material, of course, but you get what I mean.)

It seems that this relativity of rotation can't be "real" in that there's only one reference frame where conservation of momentum, conservation of energy, etc. aren't violated. (Or is there a Lorentz-transformation-like way of correcting for that?) So does that mean that even though the universe doesn't have a "here" and a "there" (i.e. no absolute

*inertial*reference frame) it*does*have an "up" and a "down", left and right, forwards and backwards? (Obviously these are anthropomorphic labels but the point is that cardinal directions are the same somehow everywhere and everywhen and in every inertial reference frame.)

Last edited by a moderator: