1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. SCI.PHYSICS.RESEARCH

  • Difference between F=ma and F=m1*m2/d^2

    From Luigi Fortunati@21:1/5 to All on Sat Apr 10 09:40:11 2021
    In the formula F=ma force is related to acceleration.

    If acceleration exists in all references, the force is real, otherwise,
    if it exists in one reference and "disappears" in the other, then the
    force is "apparent".

    On the other hand, in the formula F=m1*m2/d^2 there is NO acceleration
    and this is the difference between the second formula and the previous
    one.

    In F=m1*m2/d^2 the force depends exclusively on the presence of the two
    masses m1 and m2 (which always exist) and on the square of their
    distance (which always exists).

    Therefore, if the masses m1 and m2 and the distance d^2 never disappear
    (in any reference) the force F=m1*m2/d^2 is always real.

    And what is the force F=m1*m2/d^2? It's gravity.

    So gravity is not "apparent" because (the formula says so and not me)
    its force does not disappear by changing the SDR.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Phillip Helbig (undress to reply@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Sat Apr 10 11:45:50 2021
    In article <s4qdb4$1tfg$[email protected]>, Luigi Fortunati <[email protected]> writes:

    In the formula F=ma force is related to acceleration.

    If acceleration exists in all references, the force is real, otherwise,
    if it exists in one reference and "disappears" in the other, then the
    force is "apparent".

    You can always transform an acceleration away by using an accelerating reference frame

    On the other hand, in the formula F=m1*m2/d^2 there is NO acceleration
    and this is the difference between the second formula and the previous
    one.

    It looks like you forgot the gravitational constant; that gives the
    right-hand side the dimensions of ma.

    In F=m1*m2/d^2 the force depends exclusively on the presence of the two masses m1 and m2 (which always exist) and on the square of their
    distance (which always exists).

    And on the gravitational constant.

    Therefore, if the masses m1 and m2 and the distance d^2 never disappear
    (in any reference) the force F=m1*m2/d^2 is always real.

    Acceleration is always "real". (That is actually still a puzzle:
    acceleration relative to what? As far as I know, no-one has ever shown quantitatively that Mach's principle can explain that.)

    And what is the force F=m1*m2/d^2? It's gravity.

    Right, which is why the expression usually includes the gravitational
    constant.

    So gravity is not "apparent" because (the formula says so and not me)
    its force does not disappear by changing the SDR.

    An acceleration is real; you can feel it. You can find an accelerating reference frame and transform it away (at least locally).

    The essence of general relativity is that gravitation, in some sense, IS acceleration, but as far as I know no-one knows why the gravitational
    constant has a non-zero value or has the value it has (apart from weak-anthropic explanations).

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alex@21:1/5 to Luigi Fortunati on Mon Apr 19 19:35:21 2021
    On 10 Apr 2021 09:40:11 GMT, Luigi Fortunati wrote:

    Let me try a simpler, and clearer, answer.

    In the formula F=ma force is related to acceleration.

    I always write this formula as a=F/m in order to stress the fact that if a force F acts on a body/particle of mass m, then the particle will get an acceleration a given by a=F/m. This is the Newton's second law.

    F is the CAUSE (of the acceleration) and a is the EFFECT. I put the effect
    on the left hand side, and the cause on the right hand side,

    I DO NOT take the formula F=ma to be DEFINITIONS for F !!!

    In a=F/M, F is ANY force, of any nature, coming from various sources, for example:

    - a spring acting on the body or particle: k*x (x is the displacement from
    the equilibrium position
    - a rope - F = tension in the rope
    - a surface with which the body is in contact
    - an static electric force (Coulomb) Q1*Q2/d^2
    - or gravitational force: m1*m2/d^2
    - or friction, etc.

    Correspondingly, if on the body/particle acts, for example, only a spring,
    then the Newton's second law gives that the acceleration will be
    a=F/m=k*x/m

    Please note that the Newton's second law is only valid with respect to
    certain frames of reference. But about this - maybe later.

    IF you believe this was useful for you, please let me know and I will
    answer your questions and then I will continue.


    If acceleration exists in all references, the force is real, otherwise,
    if it exists in one reference and "disappears" in the other, then the
    force is "apparent".

    On the other hand, in the formula F=m1*m2/d^2 there is NO acceleration
    and this is the difference between the second formula and the previous
    one.

    In F=m1*m2/d^2 the force depends exclusively on the presence of the two masses m1 and m2 (which always exist) and on the square of their
    distance (which always exists).

    Therefore, if the masses m1 and m2 and the distance d^2 never disappear
    (in any reference) the force F=m1*m2/d^2 is always real.

    And what is the force F=m1*m2/d^2? It's gravity.

    So gravity is not "apparent" because (the formula says so and not me)
    its force does not disappear by changing the SDR.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From [email protected]@21:1/5 to Alex on Thu Apr 29 07:54:33 2021
    Alex <[email protected]> wrote:
    In the formula F=ma force is related to acceleration.

    I always write this formula as a=F/m in order to stress the fact that if a force F acts on a body/particle of mass m, then the particle will get an acceleration a given by a=F/m. This is the Newton's second law.


    I prefer to write: dv/dt = F/m

    F is the CAUSE (of the acceleration) and a is the EFFECT. I put the effect
    on the left hand side, and the cause on the right hand side,

    You might therefore like this paper:

    "How to be causal: time, spacetime, and spectra",
    Eur. J. Phys. 32, 1687?1700 (2011)
    doi:10.1088/0143-0807/32/6/022

    with a longer version at arxiv:1106.1792


    Mind you, some physicsts find the proposal intensely annoying,
    and they disagree with it quite strongly - despite its deliberately
    limited scope (i.e. on the interpretation of temporal differential
    equations). There are thus several extra appendices in the arxiv
    version addressing various points raised.

    #Paul

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)