Why do we treat earth and why does it work as an inertial frame

In summary: It is important for the satellite to be able to account for that. Suppose the satellite is also experiencing drag from the atmosphere. The drag from the atmosphere is the dominant effect, but in order to make useful predictions, it might be necessary to take account of the other effects. In summary, Earth is not an inertial frame because it is in orbit and has a non-uniform motion. However, in certain circumstances, we can treat it as an inertial frame and ignore the small differences in laws of motion compared to a true inertial frame. This simplifies thought experiments and allows for easier understanding of concepts in physics.
  • #1
1MileCrash
1,342
41
Earth is clearly not an inertial frame, its in orbit and not following a single direction of movement.

Why then do we treat it as one?

Are there any slight differences in the laws of motion in a true inertial frame in contrast with those on earth?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Orbiting the sun would not make the frame non-inertial, because an orbit is a geodesic. It's the fact that we are not on a geodesic that disqualifies the 'dirt' frame.

You'll prpbably recall seeing video of people floating about in the sapce-stations, as if they were in the 'vomit comet'.

See

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vomit_Comet

Excuse me, where's that bucket ?
 
Last edited:
  • #3
1MileCrash said:
Earth is clearly not an inertial frame, its in orbit and not following a single direction of movement.

Why then do we treat it as one?
The Earth travels more or less inertially, since its rotation, mass and volume has a negligible effect on its orbit. The change in direction is due to spacetime curvature.
 
Last edited:
  • #4
We treat the Earth as an inertial frame in our thought experiments to make them simpler and because we are examining some feature of Special Relativity where we want to ignore the motions and gravitational effects of the earth.

There are slight differences in a true inertial frame compared to those on Earth but they are so slight that we can ignore them most of the time, especially when limiting the discussion to Special Relativity.

Just think about the notion of a twin traveling at half the speed of light for 1 year. We are just pretending. Except for tiny particles traveling in circles, we cannot accelerate anything to anywhere near the speed of light and we cannot do it for any length of time. It's all pretend. But we are always pretending when explaining concept in physics. If we say two twins are located in the same place, we don't really mean that, we just mean for purposes of our discussion, we will treat them as if they were in the same place because the very small difference that we would have to take into account to be perfectly accurate and precise would make the problem so cumbersome that we would lose sight of the relevant feature that we were trying to examine.
 
  • #5
1MileCrash said:
Why then do we treat it as one?
Because in some circumstances we can do so without losing much accuracy. Third body effects are rather small perturbations. Even the Earth's rotation rate can be ignored in lots of settings. Suppose you are using a barometer to measure the height of a building by measuring the time it takes the barometer to fall from the top of the building to the ground. This is a crude measurement; does it really matter that you are ignoring that the Earth is not an inertial frame?
 
  • #6
1MileCrash said:
Earth is clearly not an inertial frame, its in orbit and not following a single direction of movement.

Why then do we treat it as one?

Are there any slight differences in the laws of motion in a true inertial frame in contrast with those on earth?

As others have mentioned, if you actually work out the effects of the Earth orbiting, they are small. You basically have a rotation rate of once/year (dwarfed by the fact that the Earth's natural rotation is greater than that, once per day), plus the small tidal effects from the sun.


For some discussion of the later see http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/tide.html
 
  • #7
pervect said:
You basically have a rotation rate of once/year
In Newtonian mechanics this is not a rotating frame. It is an accelerating but non-rotating frame that happens to be following a curved path. There is a tiny effect here in general relativity, de Sitter precession. For the Earth's motion about the Sun, this is *tiny*.

plus the small tidal effects from the sun.
That is what I meant when I said "third body effect": Third body acceleration = tidal gravity. The term "third body effect" is used in the aerospace community and by some astronomers because "tidal gravity" has a completely different meaning in their world. The Sun and the Moon raise tides on the Earth. Those tides change the shape of the Earth and that in turn results in some very tiny perturbations on a satellite's orbit.
 

FAQ: Why do we treat earth and why does it work as an inertial frame

Why is it important to treat Earth as an inertial frame?

Treating Earth as an inertial frame allows us to accurately describe and predict the motion of objects on its surface. This is because an inertial frame is one in which Newton's laws of motion hold true, making it a reliable reference point for measuring and analyzing motion.

How does treating Earth as an inertial frame benefit scientific research?

By treating Earth as an inertial frame, scientists are able to conduct experiments and make observations with a consistent reference point, allowing for more accurate and reliable results. This is especially important in fields such as physics and astronomy.

What evidence supports the idea of Earth being an inertial frame?

One major piece of evidence is the fact that objects in motion on Earth's surface follow predictable paths and behave in accordance with Newton's laws of motion. Additionally, the Coriolis effect, which is caused by Earth's rotation, is another example of how treating Earth as an inertial frame can explain observed phenomena.

How does Earth's rotation affect its status as an inertial frame?

Earth's rotation does not affect its status as an inertial frame as long as the motion being studied is not affected by the rotation itself. This means that for most everyday motions, such as walking or driving, treating Earth as an inertial frame is still valid. However, for high-speed or long-distance motions, the Coriolis effect must be taken into account.

Are there any exceptions to Earth being treated as an inertial frame?

Yes, there are a few exceptions. One example is when studying motions at the atomic or subatomic level, where the effects of gravity and other forces become significant. Another exception is when studying motions at a very large scale, such as the motion of galaxies, where the curvature of space-time must be considered.

Back
Top