sci.physics.relativity

Ken S. Tucker wrote:
> On Sep 13, 2:41 am, "harry" < ...@ >
> wrote:
>> "Uwe Hayek" wrote in message
>>
>> news:46e8359d$0$233$e4fe514c@ ...
>>
>>> Variable inertia.
>>> Why does everyone has so much trouble with this concept ?
>> Everyone? Only SOME people have trouble with the variable inertia /
>> relativistic mass concept.
>>
>>> After all, everything in physics is variable,
>> Everything??
>>
>>> so why should inertia remain constant, and not be caused by something else
>>> physical ?
>>> The last thing fish would study is water, and the last thing humans will
>>> study is inertia.
>>> A clock is an inertiameter.
>> :-))
>>
>> Harald
>
> I guess you could call a clock == 1/inertiameter,
> but then improve on the concept.
> I sniff a buck, a "wrist watch" that tells you how
> much you weigh.
> Regards
> Ken
>

You still missed the point somewhat.

Why do I say that a clock is an inertiameter ?

In regions with equal inertia, clocks will run at the same rate.

In regions with higher inertia clocks will run slower than clocks in
regions with lower inertia.

I understand your idea of the wristwatch, but then you refer to an
*accelerometer*, by measuring how fast a body is accelerated, under a
known force, one can determine its mass.

I do not see how you can accomplish this in a wristwatch, unless by some
very sophisticated software, and then I will still doubt the quality of
the measurement, and its commercial succes.

Some 5 years ago I saw an entertaining programme on the bbc, on the
longitude problem and they showed of lot of charlatans trying to solve
it. Eventually Harrison came up with a solution and then it dawned on me
when I posed myself this question :

What was Harrison measuring ?

/wiki/John_Harrison


Harrison was relying on the fact that spacetime on the surface of the
Earth is sufficiently flat !

Uwe Hayek.