0
Why newton's laws are not valid in non inertial frame of reference?
Wiki User
∙ 12y ago
newtons laws are always valid in non inertial frames
Wiki User
∙ 12y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What must models and theories do in order to remain valid?
they must be proven by newtons father of the other law
Does scientific method have to be controlled in order to be valid?
No, the scientific method can be uncontrolled to for it to be valid.
Is 1 n equals 1 kg correct?
No, 1N=.102kg. To convert Newtons to kilograms just divide by 9.8m/s2. This is the acceleration of gravity near Earth's surface. F=ma, where F is the force measured in Newtons, m is the mass measured in kilograms, and a is the acceleration in meters per second per second.
What is a valid investigation?
a valid investigation is an effective investigation i think. The results turn out to be what you had inferred.
Which question is valid in testing this hypothesis?
Sorry but your question doesn't make sense... You have to know what the hypothesis is to test if your question is valid.
Is newton's third law valid universally?
Only in inertial reference frames.
What does newtons law of inertia apply to?
The law of inertia applies to all physical objects.
Can movement only be measured with reference that is assumed to be fixed in pace?
No, Einstein proved that all inertial frames are equally valid references. You don't have to assume it's "fixed in place" or even know exactly how it's moving relative to any other frame as long as you know how the measured object is moving relative to the chosen reference frame.
From the perspective of Person A does time speed up for Person B the faster Person B travels?
No; just the opposite. From A's perspective, time has slowed down for B, because of his speed. (This is only measurable for appreciable fractions of the speed of light, but has been measured with super-precise atomic clocks flown around the world in an airliner. ) Curiously, B also perceives that A's time is slower, because from his own perspective, he is standing still while A is moving. And relatively speaking, both perceptions are equally valid! Incorrect. Both perceptions are not equally valid because one frame is an inertial frame of reference while the other is non-inertial. Only the perspective of the inertial (rest) frame is valid.
What is Einstiens law of relativity?
Two postulates of relativity: 1: laws of physics are same for all observers, despite how fast they are moving with respect to each other. 2: speed of light has same value measured by all observers despite how fast they are moving relative to each other. Special relativity is valid for inertial reference frames (frame where newton's 1st law holds) and explains time dilation (phenomena in which a clock moving [with v close to c] in respect to a clock in an inertial reference frame, appears to be running slower) and length contraction (length of an object moving at a v close to c appears to be contracted [in the direction of it's motion], for an observer in an inertial reference frame) relativistic modifications need to be made for kinematics if velocity is close enough to c. these modifications involve the gamma factor. General relativity is about the principle of equivalence: the effects of a gravitational field are equivalent to acceleration. this basically leads to the idea that gravity can bend spacetime, which means all objects (including light) follow geodesic paths. General rel expands special rel to include accelerating frames of reference
How long is a bank draft valid?
there is no time frame or a bank draft, it is valid for as long as you have it.
Is a psychoanalysis-psychotherapist report valid?
It depends for what. It is valid as diagnose reference to be included in an anamnesis.
What is twin paradox?
It isn't truly a paradox. Here's the problem: A spaceship leaves earth for a trip at high relativistic velocity. Aboard is one twin, the other having remained on earth. The ship is moving away from earth at high speed, and returns to earth at high speed, therefore it's time is dilated, so the twin on the ship ages more slowly and should return to earth having aged less than his earthbound counterpart. However, from the perspective of the ship, it is the earth that is moving away at high velocity, and the earthbound twin should be the one aging more slowly. The paradox dissolves when the nature of each frame of reference is taken into account. The earth is an inertial frame of reference. The spaceship, since it must undergo several positive and negative accelerations to make the round trip, is a non-inertial frame. Only the viewpoint from the intertial frame is valid. The explanation is far too long and involved to go into here, but you will find one of the best and most detailed explanations in Paul Davies' book "About Time" on pages 62 to 65.
Is Newtons first law valid for a pilot in an aircraft which is taking off?
newton's first law is not breakable. so... yes it is valid during takeoff
Does the inertial frame of reference idea work for constant velocity upward?
Inertial reference frameFirst of all, it's better to specify that an experiment done by two different obrervers in two different reference frames gives the same result only if the two reference frames are "inertial" (that is, one neither rotating nor accelerating relatively to the other, and viceversa). This is due to the relativity principle, stating that "All physical laws are the same in every inertial reference frame." So the correct question should be "Does the 'inertial frame of reference' idea work for constant velocity upward?".You are right when you say that, in this case, for scientists moving upward, getting far away from Earth, gravitation force gets weaker and weaker, and so the experiment they do gives different result from the same experiment done on the ground. The apparent paradox is solved if we analize the relativity principle better: it just says that the laws are the same, but does not tell anything about conditions. The laboratory on the ground has, as a condition, a constant filed (gravitation field, also called "acceleration of gravity", g = - GmE /rE2 ≈ 9.8 m/s2), whilst the laboratory moving upward has a different condition, that is, a decreasing field (g(t) = - GmE /(rE + vt)2): the laws are the same, but the conditions are not.When we say that an experiment done in an inertial reference frame gives the same result of the experiment done in another inertial reference frame, we leave unsaid that there must be the same conditions (when you say "the same experiment", you mean "the same experiment and the same conditions"). In fact, as you noticed, if we restore a constant field in the laboratory moving upward, instead of a decreasing one, the conditions are the same, and the experiment gives the same result, preserving the validity of relativity principle and the idea of inertial reference frame.The way you proposed to restore a constant field is not completely correct: a constant acceleration would be the perfect way only if the laboratory was very far from Earth (far from any massive body, actually): if it doesn't feel any gravitation force, then a constant acceleration of 9.8 m/s2 (that is about the value of g at the ground) would be equivalent to the situation on the Earth (and this perfect equivalence is the idea the general relativity is based on). But in our case, the laboratory moving upward is not free from the gravitation field generated by the Earth, and so the way to compensate and restore a constand field is more complex. I would say that, if we want to find what kind of motion of the laboratory would restore a constant field of the value - GmE /rE2 ≈ 9.8 m/s2, we should reason as follows.Considering that the laboratory is moving along the radius direction (with origin in the center of mass of the Earth), we can use scalars instead of vectors. Given an unknown motion h(t), the acceleration is a(t) = d2h/dt2; knowing that the gravitation field is g(t) = - GmE /(rE + h(t))2, and since we want total acceleration to be equal to - GmE /rE2, it's- GmE /rE2 = g(t) + a(t) →→ - GmE /rE2 = - GmE /(rE + h(t))2 + d2h/dt2.This should be the differential equation whose solution h = h(t) represents the equation of motion the laboratory must have in order to feel a constant field of the same value of the one felt by the laboratory on the ground.I hope this explanation is clear. The important concept is that the idea of inertial reference frame is valid everywhere, if you consider the same conditions for the experiment (in other words, it simly states that the constant velocity a system may have does not affect the laws of physics; so much so that it has no sense to ask the velocity of a system without specifying the (inertial) reference frame relatively the whom you want to know the velocity).
What must models and theories do in order to remain valid?
they must be proven by newtons father of the other law
Einstein twin paradox theory?
It isn't a theory, and it isn't truly a paradox, except to those who don't understand the relationship. Here's the problem: A spaceship leaves earth for a trip at high relativistic velocity. Aboard is one twin, the other having remained on earth. The ship is moving away from earth at high speed, and returns to earth at high speed, therefore it's time is dilated, so the twin on the ship ages more slowly and should return to earth having aged less than his earthbound counterpart. However, from the perspective of the ship, it is the earth that is moving away at high velocity, and the earthbound twin should be the one aging more slowly. The paradox dissolves when the nature of each frame of reference is taken into account. The earth is an inertial frame of reference. The spaceship, since it must undergo several positive and negative accelerations to make the round trip, is a non-inertial frame. Only the viewpoint from the intertial frame is valid. The explanation is far too long and involved to go into here, but you will find one of the best and most detailed explanations in Paul Davies' book "About Time" on pages 62 to 65.
