| <-- Previous (Exoplanets[Lost]) | (Weyl and Quasiparticles) Next --> |
Randy tells Jim about a scheme that uses Mach's Principle - the idea that there is a preferred background frame with respect to the fixed stars - to explain the origin of inertia. Why exactly does an object in motion stay in motion?
-------------------------------------------
Notes:
1. The papers we read for this program:
- The Origin of Inertia , James Woodward (blog post, 1998)
- On the Origin of Inertia, Sciama, D. W., Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 113, 34 (1953)
- Study on Inertia as a Gravity Induced Property of Mass, in an Infinite Hubble Expanding Universe,Jeroen van Engelshoven, Advances in Mathematical Physics 2013, 801574 (2013)
- On the Origin of Mass, Wilczek, F.
2. In addition, Randy sent me a lot of blog and other forum posts for background:
- https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/the-origin-of-inertia.440707/
- https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/origin-of-inertia.657760/
- http://stardrive.org/stardrive/index.php/all-blog-articles/4846-sciamas-1952-paper-on-the-qorigin-of-inertiaq
- http://stardrive.org/stardrive/index.php/all-blog-articles/12297-james-f-woodward-s-book-making-starships-and-stargates-march-10-2014
- https://quantumj13.imascientist.org.uk/2013/06/19/is-higgs-field-an-answer-to-the-property-of-inertia-and-whats-the-role-of-higgs-boson-in-it/
3. Our discussion on Gravitoelectromagnetism..
4. Our discussion of Aharonov and Rohrlich's Quantum Paradoxes, nine of the ten recorded episodes. I don't think we get into the retrocausal part of it.
5. Please visit and comment on our subreddit, and if you can help us keep this going by contributing to our Patreon, we'd be grateful.
| <-- Previous (Exoplanets[Lost]) | (Weyl and Quasiparticles) Next --> |
No comments:
Post a Comment