Originally Posted by Wizofoz
My point on weight remains this- What instrument would you use to determine whether weight is "Real" or "Apparent"? If you can't differentiate between the two, are they not the same thing?
The view of science that quantities which you cannot discriminate with instruments are the same thing is about the only philosophy of physics which has been definitively discredited in the last hundred years. So it is rather inappropriate to try it on here, don't you think?
Originally Posted by Wizofoz
I understand what you are saying about Causality, but still think it doesn't apply- Take a meteor striking the Earth- It undergoes an acceleration. Has a force caused the mass to accelerate, or has it's acceleration caused a force? My answer is "It's the same thing, as they are EQUIVALENT
Repeating an assertion doesn't make it any more persuasive to me. It rather suggests that you might benefit from deeper understanding of causality. Let me recommend the counterfactual notion, proposed first by David Hume but not really pursued very deeply until David Lewis did so in the early 1970's. You might start with his papers Causality and Causal Explanation, both in his Philosophical Papers vol II. Peter Menzies has a pretty good account in the on-line Stanford Encyclopedia,
Counterfactual Theories of Causation
Originally Posted by Wizofoz
Several posts by you since I explained you were in error regarding rotation. It exists (as does it's effect) in any frame of reference. Do you acknowledge this? ..........
I'm sorry, but you write in riddles. I'd appreciate a clear explanation of your understanding of this.
I note, again, that you are confused about my understanding of mechanics. I am here to have fun talking about topics of mutual interest. If you can't interpret what I say, fine. There is no law saying it has to be sorted out.
PBL