The principle of equivalence - that, locally, you can't distinguish between a uniform gravitational field and a non-inertial frame accelerating in the sense opposite to the gravitational field - is dependent on the equality of gravitational and inertial mass. Is there any deeper reason for why this equality of "charge corresponding to gravitation" (that is, the gravitational mass) and the inertial mass (that, in Newtonian mechanics, enters the equation $F=ma$) should hold? While it has been observed to be true to a very high precision, is there any theoretical backing or justification for this? You could, for example (I wonder what physics would look like then, though), have the "charge corresponding to electromagnetic theory" equal to the the inertial mass, but that isn't seen to be the case.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
classical mechanics - Moment of a force about a given axis (Torque) - Scalar or vectorial?
I am studying Statics and saw that: The moment of a force about a given axis (or Torque) is defined by the equation: $M_X = (\vec r \times \...
-
cosmology - The difference between comoving and proper distances in defining the observable universe"The radius of the observable universe is estimated to be about 46.5 Gly." If I understand correctly, it means the most distant ob...
-
Everyone always talks about the efficiency of their appliances. I was wondering if everything was 100% efficient at heating its surroundings...
-
Are C1, C2 and C3 connected in parallel, or C2, C3 in parallel and C1 in series with C23? Btw it appeared as a question in the basic physics...
No comments:
Post a Comment