Is Earth an inertial reference frame?











up vote
2
down vote

favorite












Is earth considered as inertial frame? i was confused because we learned about coriolis effect. We know that earth spins therefore coriolis effect should take place . But does it have minimal effect for motion of balls etc when they move with respect to the ground?










share|cite|improve this question
























  • you can calculate it's size, e.g, for a BMG 50 cal (853 m/s muzzle velocity) shot at its max effective range (1,800m) and tell us.
    – JEB
    4 hours ago










  • This question seems synonymous with "Does the earth rotate (with respect to the rest of the universe)?"
    – Geremia
    31 mins ago















up vote
2
down vote

favorite












Is earth considered as inertial frame? i was confused because we learned about coriolis effect. We know that earth spins therefore coriolis effect should take place . But does it have minimal effect for motion of balls etc when they move with respect to the ground?










share|cite|improve this question
























  • you can calculate it's size, e.g, for a BMG 50 cal (853 m/s muzzle velocity) shot at its max effective range (1,800m) and tell us.
    – JEB
    4 hours ago










  • This question seems synonymous with "Does the earth rotate (with respect to the rest of the universe)?"
    – Geremia
    31 mins ago













up vote
2
down vote

favorite









up vote
2
down vote

favorite











Is earth considered as inertial frame? i was confused because we learned about coriolis effect. We know that earth spins therefore coriolis effect should take place . But does it have minimal effect for motion of balls etc when they move with respect to the ground?










share|cite|improve this question















Is earth considered as inertial frame? i was confused because we learned about coriolis effect. We know that earth spins therefore coriolis effect should take place . But does it have minimal effect for motion of balls etc when they move with respect to the ground?







newtonian-mechanics reference-frames inertial-frames earth coriolis-effect






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 2 hours ago









Qmechanic

100k121791123




100k121791123










asked 5 hours ago









ado sar

1027




1027












  • you can calculate it's size, e.g, for a BMG 50 cal (853 m/s muzzle velocity) shot at its max effective range (1,800m) and tell us.
    – JEB
    4 hours ago










  • This question seems synonymous with "Does the earth rotate (with respect to the rest of the universe)?"
    – Geremia
    31 mins ago


















  • you can calculate it's size, e.g, for a BMG 50 cal (853 m/s muzzle velocity) shot at its max effective range (1,800m) and tell us.
    – JEB
    4 hours ago










  • This question seems synonymous with "Does the earth rotate (with respect to the rest of the universe)?"
    – Geremia
    31 mins ago
















you can calculate it's size, e.g, for a BMG 50 cal (853 m/s muzzle velocity) shot at its max effective range (1,800m) and tell us.
– JEB
4 hours ago




you can calculate it's size, e.g, for a BMG 50 cal (853 m/s muzzle velocity) shot at its max effective range (1,800m) and tell us.
– JEB
4 hours ago












This question seems synonymous with "Does the earth rotate (with respect to the rest of the universe)?"
– Geremia
31 mins ago




This question seems synonymous with "Does the earth rotate (with respect to the rest of the universe)?"
– Geremia
31 mins ago










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
3
down vote













The surface of the Earth is not, rigorously speaking, an inertial frame of reference. Objects at rest relative to Earth's surface are actually subject to a series of inertial effects, like the ficticious forces (Coriolis, centrifugal etc.) because of Earth's rotation, precession and other kinds of acceleration.



When solving physics problems, however, we usually take the Earth frame as being inertial. This is because the inertial effects are minuscule for most of our day-to-day experiences and experiments. For example, objects in the Equator are the ones subject to the strongest centrifugal force and it is only about $3 times10^{-3}$ or $0.3%$ of their weight.



So for the most part, if an experiment is short enough and happens in a small enough region, the surface of Earth can indeed be approximated to an inertial frame of reference since the effects on the experiment's results are very, very tiny.



This of course has exceptions, as cited in njspeer's answer.



If however by "Earth" you mean the reference frame in Earth's center, it also not inertial due to the fact that the planet accelerates while orbiting the Sun and the Milky Way.






share|cite|improve this answer




























    up vote
    1
    down vote













    Because the earth is rotating, it is never strictly an inertial reference frame. However, because the effects are small in many situations, it can often be approximated as one. When to use Coriolis forces will have to be determined on a case-by-case basis. E.g. ballistic problems that cover large distances will most certainly require Coriolis-force corrections, and pendulums that swings for a long time would also require Coriolis-force corrections. For a block sliding down an inclined plane, or a spring on a mass, or a vibrating string, you should not need to take it into consideration.






    share|cite|improve this answer






























      up vote
      0
      down vote













      Mach would say that the earth could be considered at rest and non-inertial effects are due to the rest of the universe.



      See:
      • Assis, André K. T. Relational Mechanics and Implementation of Mach’s Principle with Weber’s Gravitational Force. Montréal: Apeiron, 2014.






      share|cite|improve this answer





















        Your Answer





        StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
        return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
        StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
        StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
        });
        });
        }, "mathjax-editing");

        StackExchange.ready(function() {
        var channelOptions = {
        tags: "".split(" "),
        id: "151"
        };
        initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

        StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
        // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
        if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
        StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
        createEditor();
        });
        }
        else {
        createEditor();
        }
        });

        function createEditor() {
        StackExchange.prepareEditor({
        heartbeatType: 'answer',
        convertImagesToLinks: false,
        noModals: true,
        showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
        reputationToPostImages: null,
        bindNavPrevention: true,
        postfix: "",
        imageUploader: {
        brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
        contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
        allowUrls: true
        },
        noCode: true, onDemand: true,
        discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
        ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
        });


        }
        });














        draft saved

        draft discarded


















        StackExchange.ready(
        function () {
        StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f444580%2fis-earth-an-inertial-reference-frame%23new-answer', 'question_page');
        }
        );

        Post as a guest















        Required, but never shown

























        3 Answers
        3






        active

        oldest

        votes








        3 Answers
        3






        active

        oldest

        votes









        active

        oldest

        votes






        active

        oldest

        votes








        up vote
        3
        down vote













        The surface of the Earth is not, rigorously speaking, an inertial frame of reference. Objects at rest relative to Earth's surface are actually subject to a series of inertial effects, like the ficticious forces (Coriolis, centrifugal etc.) because of Earth's rotation, precession and other kinds of acceleration.



        When solving physics problems, however, we usually take the Earth frame as being inertial. This is because the inertial effects are minuscule for most of our day-to-day experiences and experiments. For example, objects in the Equator are the ones subject to the strongest centrifugal force and it is only about $3 times10^{-3}$ or $0.3%$ of their weight.



        So for the most part, if an experiment is short enough and happens in a small enough region, the surface of Earth can indeed be approximated to an inertial frame of reference since the effects on the experiment's results are very, very tiny.



        This of course has exceptions, as cited in njspeer's answer.



        If however by "Earth" you mean the reference frame in Earth's center, it also not inertial due to the fact that the planet accelerates while orbiting the Sun and the Milky Way.






        share|cite|improve this answer

























          up vote
          3
          down vote













          The surface of the Earth is not, rigorously speaking, an inertial frame of reference. Objects at rest relative to Earth's surface are actually subject to a series of inertial effects, like the ficticious forces (Coriolis, centrifugal etc.) because of Earth's rotation, precession and other kinds of acceleration.



          When solving physics problems, however, we usually take the Earth frame as being inertial. This is because the inertial effects are minuscule for most of our day-to-day experiences and experiments. For example, objects in the Equator are the ones subject to the strongest centrifugal force and it is only about $3 times10^{-3}$ or $0.3%$ of their weight.



          So for the most part, if an experiment is short enough and happens in a small enough region, the surface of Earth can indeed be approximated to an inertial frame of reference since the effects on the experiment's results are very, very tiny.



          This of course has exceptions, as cited in njspeer's answer.



          If however by "Earth" you mean the reference frame in Earth's center, it also not inertial due to the fact that the planet accelerates while orbiting the Sun and the Milky Way.






          share|cite|improve this answer























            up vote
            3
            down vote










            up vote
            3
            down vote









            The surface of the Earth is not, rigorously speaking, an inertial frame of reference. Objects at rest relative to Earth's surface are actually subject to a series of inertial effects, like the ficticious forces (Coriolis, centrifugal etc.) because of Earth's rotation, precession and other kinds of acceleration.



            When solving physics problems, however, we usually take the Earth frame as being inertial. This is because the inertial effects are minuscule for most of our day-to-day experiences and experiments. For example, objects in the Equator are the ones subject to the strongest centrifugal force and it is only about $3 times10^{-3}$ or $0.3%$ of their weight.



            So for the most part, if an experiment is short enough and happens in a small enough region, the surface of Earth can indeed be approximated to an inertial frame of reference since the effects on the experiment's results are very, very tiny.



            This of course has exceptions, as cited in njspeer's answer.



            If however by "Earth" you mean the reference frame in Earth's center, it also not inertial due to the fact that the planet accelerates while orbiting the Sun and the Milky Way.






            share|cite|improve this answer












            The surface of the Earth is not, rigorously speaking, an inertial frame of reference. Objects at rest relative to Earth's surface are actually subject to a series of inertial effects, like the ficticious forces (Coriolis, centrifugal etc.) because of Earth's rotation, precession and other kinds of acceleration.



            When solving physics problems, however, we usually take the Earth frame as being inertial. This is because the inertial effects are minuscule for most of our day-to-day experiences and experiments. For example, objects in the Equator are the ones subject to the strongest centrifugal force and it is only about $3 times10^{-3}$ or $0.3%$ of their weight.



            So for the most part, if an experiment is short enough and happens in a small enough region, the surface of Earth can indeed be approximated to an inertial frame of reference since the effects on the experiment's results are very, very tiny.



            This of course has exceptions, as cited in njspeer's answer.



            If however by "Earth" you mean the reference frame in Earth's center, it also not inertial due to the fact that the planet accelerates while orbiting the Sun and the Milky Way.







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered 4 hours ago









            João Vítor G. Lima

            618118




            618118






















                up vote
                1
                down vote













                Because the earth is rotating, it is never strictly an inertial reference frame. However, because the effects are small in many situations, it can often be approximated as one. When to use Coriolis forces will have to be determined on a case-by-case basis. E.g. ballistic problems that cover large distances will most certainly require Coriolis-force corrections, and pendulums that swings for a long time would also require Coriolis-force corrections. For a block sliding down an inclined plane, or a spring on a mass, or a vibrating string, you should not need to take it into consideration.






                share|cite|improve this answer



























                  up vote
                  1
                  down vote













                  Because the earth is rotating, it is never strictly an inertial reference frame. However, because the effects are small in many situations, it can often be approximated as one. When to use Coriolis forces will have to be determined on a case-by-case basis. E.g. ballistic problems that cover large distances will most certainly require Coriolis-force corrections, and pendulums that swings for a long time would also require Coriolis-force corrections. For a block sliding down an inclined plane, or a spring on a mass, or a vibrating string, you should not need to take it into consideration.






                  share|cite|improve this answer

























                    up vote
                    1
                    down vote










                    up vote
                    1
                    down vote









                    Because the earth is rotating, it is never strictly an inertial reference frame. However, because the effects are small in many situations, it can often be approximated as one. When to use Coriolis forces will have to be determined on a case-by-case basis. E.g. ballistic problems that cover large distances will most certainly require Coriolis-force corrections, and pendulums that swings for a long time would also require Coriolis-force corrections. For a block sliding down an inclined plane, or a spring on a mass, or a vibrating string, you should not need to take it into consideration.






                    share|cite|improve this answer














                    Because the earth is rotating, it is never strictly an inertial reference frame. However, because the effects are small in many situations, it can often be approximated as one. When to use Coriolis forces will have to be determined on a case-by-case basis. E.g. ballistic problems that cover large distances will most certainly require Coriolis-force corrections, and pendulums that swings for a long time would also require Coriolis-force corrections. For a block sliding down an inclined plane, or a spring on a mass, or a vibrating string, you should not need to take it into consideration.







                    share|cite|improve this answer














                    share|cite|improve this answer



                    share|cite|improve this answer








                    edited 1 hour ago

























                    answered 5 hours ago









                    njspeer

                    3594




                    3594






















                        up vote
                        0
                        down vote













                        Mach would say that the earth could be considered at rest and non-inertial effects are due to the rest of the universe.



                        See:
                        • Assis, André K. T. Relational Mechanics and Implementation of Mach’s Principle with Weber’s Gravitational Force. Montréal: Apeiron, 2014.






                        share|cite|improve this answer

























                          up vote
                          0
                          down vote













                          Mach would say that the earth could be considered at rest and non-inertial effects are due to the rest of the universe.



                          See:
                          • Assis, André K. T. Relational Mechanics and Implementation of Mach’s Principle with Weber’s Gravitational Force. Montréal: Apeiron, 2014.






                          share|cite|improve this answer























                            up vote
                            0
                            down vote










                            up vote
                            0
                            down vote









                            Mach would say that the earth could be considered at rest and non-inertial effects are due to the rest of the universe.



                            See:
                            • Assis, André K. T. Relational Mechanics and Implementation of Mach’s Principle with Weber’s Gravitational Force. Montréal: Apeiron, 2014.






                            share|cite|improve this answer












                            Mach would say that the earth could be considered at rest and non-inertial effects are due to the rest of the universe.



                            See:
                            • Assis, André K. T. Relational Mechanics and Implementation of Mach’s Principle with Weber’s Gravitational Force. Montréal: Apeiron, 2014.







                            share|cite|improve this answer












                            share|cite|improve this answer



                            share|cite|improve this answer










                            answered 27 mins ago









                            Geremia

                            1,1322927




                            1,1322927






























                                draft saved

                                draft discarded




















































                                Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!


                                • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                But avoid



                                • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                                To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                                Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                                Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                                • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                But avoid



                                • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                draft saved


                                draft discarded














                                StackExchange.ready(
                                function () {
                                StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f444580%2fis-earth-an-inertial-reference-frame%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                }
                                );

                                Post as a guest















                                Required, but never shown





















































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown

































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown







                                Popular posts from this blog

                                サソリ

                                広島県道265号伴広島線

                                Setup Asymptote in Texstudio