Why do Newton's laws of motion only work in inertial frames?

  • Thread starter Thread starter astro2cosmos
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Law Newton's law
AI Thread Summary
Newton's laws of motion are only valid in inertial frames because they do not account for fictitious forces present in non-inertial frames. In non-inertial frames, forces like the Coriolis and centrifugal forces must be introduced to apply Newton's laws correctly. These fictitious forces arise due to acceleration and are essential for maintaining the consistency of Newtonian mechanics in rotating or accelerating reference frames. Thus, while Newton's laws can be adapted for non-inertial frames, they require the inclusion of these additional forces. Understanding this distinction is crucial for accurately applying Newton's laws in various contexts.
astro2cosmos
Messages
71
Reaction score
0
why the Newton's law of motion are only valid in inertial frame of reference, not in non-inertial frame? since force like Coriolis force are not considered for these laws.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The Coriolis force is an example of a fictitious force that needs to be added when viewing things from a rotating frame in order to apply Newton's laws. Fictitious forces only appear in accelerating reference frames.
 
Hi astro2cosmos! :smile:

In a non-inertial frame, Newton's laws of motion are valid if we allow fictitious forces such as centrifugal force and Coriolis force …

that is what the fictitious forces were invented for, to make Newton's laws work! :wink:
 

Thread '1:1 versus 2:1 Mechanical Advantage debate'

The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
View full post »

Thread 'Newton's first law?'

Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
View full post »
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
View full post »

Similar threads

I 1st law of Newton as a special case of the 2nd law (historical aspect)
Replies
10
Views
3K
I Newton's Third Law: Action & Reaction Along the Line Connecting Two Objects
Replies
5
Views
1K
Empirical and Definitional Content of Newton's Laws
3
Replies
117
Views
9K
Covariance of Newton's 2nd Law under Galilean boosts
Replies
38
Views
4K
I Using reference frames for derivation of Lagrangian
Replies
25
Views
2K
Law of inertia (inertial observer and inertial frames of reference)
Replies
2
Views
1K
What Do Newton's Laws Say When Carefully Analysed
5
Replies
240
Views
19K
Understanding Newton's First Law and Referential Inertial on a Moving Earth
Replies
1
Views
1K
What is an inertial frame? A conflict of two definitions
2
Replies
83
Views
5K
Galilean Relativity and Newton's Laws
Replies
2
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top