Understanding Inertial reference frames

[Nugatory]

"IRF's do not require any objects in them to be inertial", I meant that an IRF [STRIKE]could[/STRIKE] might contain only non-inertial objects, as my example of the Earth and the Moon in circular motion around each other shows."

if IRF's contain only non-inertial objects, what about non-IRFs? What will they consist of? What are they?...

(I've made one correction to the above, to fix something that might be misleading to readers for whom English is not their first language).

Any frame of reference, whether it is inertial or not, may contain no objects, only inertial objects, only non-inertial objects, or both.

 

[bahamagreen]

Let me ask something IRF related that I have not been able to find anything about. Keeping in mind the "mechanics holds good" part of the IRF includes conservation of momentum...?

When vacuum fluctuation pair production occurs, do the velocities of the particles indicate they obey conservation so the origin of their departure (COM) is at rest wrt the observer, or do the particles indicate by differential velocities wrt the irf observer that by conservation, the origin of their departure is in relative motion wrt the observer?

In other words, taking SR into account, are the fluctuations themselves underlying pair production thought of as having any allowable sub c velocity wrt the IRF observer?

 

[ghwellsjr]

OM SAI RAM



George sir, this is saipathudu here. Personal problems plagued my life and even before the moment of my death, my thirst to learn relativity would go on...now i came back rejuvenated, but i fear whether you will believe my words and my THIRST TO LEARN THIS AT ANY COST AT THIS CRITICAL JUNCTURE OF MY LIFE. I just need your "INVALUABLE ASSISTANCE" to me to learn this really tough subject.

So sorry to hear about your personal problems but glad to hear you are rejuvenated now.

However, I would not say that Special Relativity is a "really tough subject". General Relativity is, but not SR. If you think it is tough, it's because you are misunderstanding it so I encourage you not to be intimidated by the subject of SR.

i want to start from the beginning. George sir and all others who replied my queries regarding this IRFs, am really indebted. This time i am determined to learn it out by putting in my EVERYTHING...Please George sir AND ALL OTHERS...HELP ME OUT.

I started from the beginning of this thread and read all of your posts and all of my responses. I think it would be good for you to do the same. I think all your questions have already been answered.

Firstly...these words...Earth's rest state...really i got stuck here...

then this statement George sir

"IRF's do not require any objects in them to be inertial", I meant that an IRF could contain only non-inertial objects, as my example of the Earth and the Moon in circular motion around each other shows."

if IRF's contain only non-inertial objects, what about non-IRFs? What will they consist of? What are they?...Without understanding this moot point, i was unable to make any headway George sir...Please throw light into this question sir...Hope to hear from you all my tutors...and especially from you Mr. George...

Regards,
saipathudut/srinivasant

OM SAI SRI SAI JAYA JAYA SAI

I'm not saying that an IRF cannot contain objects that are inertial, I'm just saying that an IRF does not have to be linked to an inertial object. When we are imagining a scenario, we can use an IRF to describe the positions, velocities, and accelerations of as many objects and observers as we want. We are not required to describe any of them as being at fixed locations, at fixed velocities, or a fixed accelerations. Any IRF can handle any scenario we desire. Does that help?

Let's leave the subject of non-IRF's until after we have a firm grasp of IRF's, OK?

 

[saipathudut]

George sir...

So sorry to hear about your personal problems but glad to hear you are rejuvenated now.

However, I would not say that Special Relativity is a "really tough subject". General Relativity is, but not SR. If you think it is tough, it's because you are misunderstanding it so I encourage you not to be intimidated by the subject of SR.

I started from the beginning of this thread and read all of your posts and all of my responses. I think it would be good for you to do the same. I think all your questions have already been answered.

I'm not saying that an IRF cannot contain objects that are inertial, I'm just saying that an IRF does not have to be linked to an inertial object. When we are imagining a scenario, we can use an IRF to describe the positions, velocities, and accelerations of as many objects and observers as we want. We are not required to describe any of them as being at fixed locations, at fixed velocities, or a fixed accelerations. Any IRF can handle any scenario we desire. Does that help?

Let's leave the subject of non-IRF's until after we have a firm grasp of IRF's, OK?

First of all, George sir, please suggest me some good websites to learn "The Special Relativity"...This time i want to make sure that i successfully complete this endeavor and strike at the grass root level and want to be strong at the basics of this great subject...and also please guide me some fantastic, simple, and some wonderful books on "The Special Relativity" by great authors. George sir, i would be really very much grateful to you if you throw your invaluable assistance and guidance in this regard. I am really very much indebted all other members who tried to help me out in learning this subject. Also, George sir i am really very, very lucky to get a mentor like you and this reflects from the fact that you showed a lot of patience to explain my doubts.

Regards,
saipathudut/srinivasant

 

[ghwellsjr]

First of all, George sir, please suggest me some good websites to learn "The Special Relativity"...

I can't think of a better one than this one. I would recommend that you just read many threads on this forum, that's what I did for a year before I ever made my first post. You can learn a lot by following how others learned.

This time i want to make sure that i successfully complete this endeavor and strike at the grass root level and want to be strong at the basics of this great subject...and also please guide me some fantastic, simple, and some wonderful books on "The Special Relativity" by great authors.

The best book I can recommend is Einstein's which you can read online:
http://www.bartleby.com/173/

George sir, i would be really very much grateful to you if you throw your invaluable assistance and guidance in this regard. I am really very much indebted all other members who tried to help me out in learning this subject. Also, George sir i am really very, very lucky to get a mentor like you and this reflects from the fact that you showed a lot of patience to explain my doubts.

Regards,
saipathudut/srinivasant

Thanks.