[Physics] About "logical errors"

[carmam at tiscali.co.uk]

Mike, that thought experiment is exactly what Einstein first used to formulate his equivalence principle. He says it does not matter what the (driving) force is, and I agree with him there, as it certainly has absolutely no bearing on the result of the experiment. All that is required is an external force which holds the chest (or room in my though experiment) at exactly 1G, no matter what the mass inside it. To almost quote Einstein :-  "It is immaterial what the driving force is, but it might be convenient to imagine a hypothetical being pulling on a rope".The mass of the Earth is not and should not be included in the calculation, just the gravity. The mass and the distance could be greater or smaller in proportion to keep the gravity at 1G. All that matters is that the gravity is 1G. I am being as consistent as Einstein. You have all the information which you need to answer the question. I think now that you are an ardent relativist, despite thinking earlier that perhaps you were not. You have replied twice now without answering the question, even though (and I am assuming this) you agree with Einstein's original thought experiment as taught in mainstream physics to prove the EP. You cannot be selective in agreeing with one and not the other, when the setups are identical, and just the test masses are different.Tom.



----Original Message----

From: mike at mlawrence.co.uk

Date: 10/11/2016 15:22

To: "General Physics and Natural Philosophy discussion list"<physics at tuks.nl>

Subj: Re: [Physics] About "logical errors"





Tom,

No problem on the slow reply. But I disagree that it 
does not matter what is providing the acceleration. There is energy 
being given to the object which needs to be considered. In the 
acceleration due to gravity, there is the mass of the Earth being 
included in the calculation. In the frame of reference of the object 
under gravitational attraction, gravity appears as a force pulling 
downwards (using basic terminology and avoiding curving space 
explanations!). In the acceleration case, in the FOR of the object there
is a force acting to move the object faster...... but you don't include
the source of that force in your calculation. You need to be consistent
in treatment before I step further into answering your questions.



Cheers

Mike Lawrence 




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.tuks.nl/pipermail/physics/attachments/20161110/e9f8d259/attachment.html>