Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!ucbvax!brahms!desj
From: desj@brahms.BERKELEY.EDU (David desJardins)
Newsgroups: net.physics,net.origins
Subject: Re: Bogus physics reamplified
Message-ID: <12430@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: Sun, 16-Mar-86 06:16:29 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.12430
Posted: Sun Mar 16 06:16:29 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 18-Mar-86 01:24:51 EST
References: <368@ihnet.UUCP> <2057@jhunix.UUCP> <2874@sjuvax.UUCP> <446@3comvax.UUCP> <1825@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: desj@brahms.UUCP (David desJardins)
Distribution: net
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 15
Xref: watmath net.physics:3946 net.origins:2959

In article <1825@brl-smoke.ARPA> gwyn@brl.ARPA writes:
>
>The idea that centrifugal force can be explained by the inductive
>effect of all matter in the universe is known as Mach's principle.
>This principle appears to be necessary for any theory that claims
>that there is no absolute motion.

   Am I stupid?  I have reread the first sentence above many many times
and can't make any sense out of it.  In an empty (flat) universe some
frames are accelerated and some are not.  This is in the absence of any
matter.  What does "the inductive effect of all matter in the universe"
have to do with centrifugal force??
   This is not an attack, just a request for explanation...

   -- David desJardins