[002]
ading
Current Version
Changed line(s) 6 from:
n
@RichardAK: \
to:
@Tropers/RichardAK: \\\"[...] it is still the case that from the frame of reference of an observer standing on the surface of a rotating planet, he is at rest and the rest of the universe is revolving around him.\\\"
I think it is not true. If there are two observers, A and B, and A is rotating around B there is a way for them to determine which of them is rotating and who is not. A rotating observer is accelerating, which creates centrifugal force, (undistinguishable from gravity because of the equivalence principle), possibly making him slightly nauseous. Observer B is not accelerating, so no centrifugal force and no gravity (or nausea) for him. Which means that frames of reference are not interchangable, so that it would be false to say that it\\\'s B who\\\'s rotating around A. Same here. In other words, Sun definitely is NOT rotating around Earth, because it\\\'s we, who experiences admittedly infinitesimal centrifugal force, and not the Sun.
But! - and this is a huge \\\'but\\\'. I am a poor physicist. If I made any mistakes you may persuade me and we will put it back.
I think it is not true. If there are two observers, A and B, and A is rotating around B there is a way for them to determine which of them is rotating and who is not. A rotating observer is accelerating, which creates centrifugal force, (undistinguishable from gravity because of the equivalence principle), possibly making him slightly nauseous. Observer B is not accelerating, so no centrifugal force and no gravity (or nausea) for him. Which means that frames of reference are not interchangable, so that it would be false to say that it\\\'s B who\\\'s rotating around A. Same here. In other words, Sun definitely is NOT rotating around Earth, because it\\\'s we, who experiences admittedly infinitesimal centrifugal force, and not the Sun.
But! - and this is a huge \\\'but\\\'. I am a poor physicist. If I made any mistakes you may persuade me and we will put it back.
Changed line(s) 6 from:
n
@RichardAK: \
to:
@RichardAK: \\\"[...] it is still the case that from the frame of reference of an observer standing on the surface of a rotating planet, he is at rest and the rest of the universe is revolving around him.\\\"
I think it is not true. If there are two observers, A and B, and A is rotating around B there is a way for them to determine which of them is rotating and who is not. A rotating observer is accelerating, which creates centrifugal force, (undistinguishable from gravity because of the equivalence principle), possibly making him slightly nauseous. Observer B is not accelerating, so no centrifugal force and no gravity (or nausea) for him. Which means that frames of reference are not interchangable, so that it would be false to say that it\\\'s B who\\\'s rotating around A. Same here. In other words, Sun definitely is NOT rotating around Earth, because it\\\'s we, who experiences admittedly infinitesimal centrifugal force, and not the Sun.
But! - and this is a huge \\\'but\\\'. I am a poor physicist. If I made any mistakes you may persuade me and we will put it back.
I think it is not true. If there are two observers, A and B, and A is rotating around B there is a way for them to determine which of them is rotating and who is not. A rotating observer is accelerating, which creates centrifugal force, (undistinguishable from gravity because of the equivalence principle), possibly making him slightly nauseous. Observer B is not accelerating, so no centrifugal force and no gravity (or nausea) for him. Which means that frames of reference are not interchangable, so that it would be false to say that it\\\'s B who\\\'s rotating around A. Same here. In other words, Sun definitely is NOT rotating around Earth, because it\\\'s we, who experiences admittedly infinitesimal centrifugal force, and not the Sun.
But! - and this is a huge \\\'but\\\'. I am a poor physicist. If I made any mistakes you may persuade me and we will put it back.
