Galileo discovered that all inertial objects fall at the same rate.
Since all things fall at the same rate from the same height,
regardless of their weight "mg", the Earth attractor accelerative
component "g" cannot be acting on mass. The quantitative notation "mg"
consists of two separate quantities that are united through our "feel"
of attraction to the Earth. We have our "feel" of attraction to the
Earth, and we have the experimental results from Eotvos. Eotvos shows
that mass is an inconsequential quantity to the Earth attractor.
Eotvos shows that our "feel" of attraction to the Earth cannot be
generated by mass. This leaves that "feel" as "inertial mass" of the
type "g". Since we feel an attraction to the Earth, this attraction
has to be acting on something other than mass.

Galileo discovered that the Earth attractor does not act on mass.
Eotvos and others have verified this to a high degree of accuracy,
with no indication that it will ever be otherwise. Yet Newton defined
a quantity called "gravitational mass" based on the experimentally
verifiable behavior of "inertial mass" because he "felt" an Earth
attractor force, and because his third law applied to inertial mass.
To paraphrase Newton: "Because it is true for all the matter within
our ability to experimentally verify, it is true for all matter
whatsoever."

With respect to the Earth attractor, It has been shown that inertial
mass operates within least action parameters, during free fall, escape
velocity, and orbit, without effect. OTOH wrt interactions between
inertial mass of the type "a" and "v", and with "g" on the balance
scale and at impact after free fall, and with humans, inertial mass
operates within least action principles, with great effect. We have
"inertial mass" operating within least action parameters in every
case.

Eotvos has shown that the Earth attractor does not act on mass during
free fall. Mass does not figure in the equations for orbit, or for the
escape velocity from the earth. Therefore I say that the planets and
stars do not delineate between, or act on mass types. Wrt planets and
stars, inertial resistance seldom approaches a magnitude sufficient to
cause anything greater than minor irregularities to occur. Inertial
resistance can stress the controlling mechanism of some planet-star
attractors but it is as a contained consequence of the fact that
inertial mass is not acted on by these attractors. Uranus may
dramatically show the effect of inertial mass wrt to the Sun
attractor.

Our failure to recognize that planet-star attractors do not act on
inertial mass, gave us a reason to ponder on the apparent remarkable
"coincidence" that inertial mass and the mass of planets and stars are
the same. Whereas, it is our "feel" of inertial mass of the type "g"
that is identical to our "feel" of inertial mass of the types "a" and
"v". This "feel" equivalence is a conceptual basis for the validity
of general relativity (GR). The argument was put forward by Einstein
as a thought experiment (gedanken) in terms of an elevator, pointing
out that we (through our sense of feel),cannot discern between an
inertial field and a gravitational field. This being the case, the
correct conclusion is: in terms of force "ma", weight "mg", and
momentum "mv", all we have is an inertial field. Even so, we kept the
two fields and made them equivalent. The "feel" of "attraction",
quantified as "inertial mass" of the type "g" (weight), continued to
serve as the basis for assuming that "gravitational mass" is the
universal macro-controller for least action motion. However, even
though the PoE (principle of equivalence) sets inertial and
gravitational mass equivalent, just as though the Earth attractor acts
on inertial mass, the conclusion that inertial mass of the type "g",
is acted on by the Earth attractor depends on our "feel" of attraction
to the Earth, and flies in the face of accurate experimental data.

Because these inertial mass types operate within the Earth attractor
least action parameters, we are able to describe the planets and sun
system in terms of F=ma. In this equation, the quantities "F" and "m"
have magnitudes that are quantified consistent with our "feel", and
verified by measure of "inertial mass" of the types "a", "v" and "g".
The quantity "a" denotes a change in velocity, which, with velocity as
a vector, can represent a change in direction, and, so represent the
quantity we call centripetal acceleration. With this in place it is a
small step to generalize our "feel" derived inertial quantity "m" to
the planet and star quasi-quantity angular momentum "mv/r".

We have difficulty in resolving a visually observable physical event,
with the same event, as interpretted by our tactile sense. We separate
the event into two diferent classes, based on our different senses,
and generalize one sensory quantity to the universe utilizing the "in
place" least action motion that is a general property of the stable
systems in the universe, where our operational quantities are a
special case of that property. This, rather than resolving the
sensory information data, itself.

I have explained that inertial mass of the types "g", "a", and "v" is
not acted on by the Earth attractor, fully aware that "we" are acted
upon by the Earth attractor, and that Newtonian Gravity holds that our
feel attraction is generated by mass, and that general relativity (GR)
permanently enshrines this notion as an assumptive aspect of its first
principle. So the question is: why does mass function within least
action parameters everywhere. Because mass is not acted on by the
planet-star attractors. However, something is acted on that enables us
to isolate the quantity mass. What do you suppose it is?

We "feel" the Earth attractor acting on our constituent atoms*. We
feel our atoms as we are pressed to the earth, as weight "mg". Each
atom falls to the Earth at the same rate from the same height.
Inertial mass is the sum of the acted upon atoms and is proportionally
quantified in terms of "mg", "ma", and "mv". Since the Earth attractor
acts on our constituent atoms, "inertial mass" of the types "a", "v"
and "g", is conserved in all interactions and reflects the atomic
compositional dynamics of the interacting objects, in terms of our
"feel" quantities "ma", "mv" and "mg".

To sum: It is our tactile sense that we base the quantification of
"inertial mass" of the type "g" on, while using our visual sense to
quantify the "inertial mass" of types "a", and "v". It is our "feel"
of "inertial mass" of the types "a", "v", and "g" that we quantify as
equivalent. The Earth attractor acts on our constituent atoms and does
not act on inertial mass of any type. However, inertial mass of all
types are proportionally interactive in the field that allows their
measure.

As a closing note, I will point out here, that the quantity mass can
be presumptively generalized as the cause of planet-star attraction to
all universe systems that meet the same criteria as the system within
which it was isolated. But, if we choose to continue to "assume" the
generalization accurately applies to the planet-star interactions, we
must minimally acknowledge that:

1) This is an unproved assumption. 2) It works because mass operates
within least action principles 3) It will work even if the mass
magnitudes between the planets and stars are not proportional to the
mass magnitudes quantified consistent with our feel. 4) It will
provide consistent time space data. 5) though possibly erroneous data
in some areas other than time and space 6) It is not a unit of matter
7) We can, because of least action principles, and because mass is not
acted on by the Earth attractor, set the planet and star interactions
proportionally equivalent to our feel quantities, ma, mg and mv. 8) …

Send a copy of any response to if you want a
timely reply.

The Repuglicans wasted some 4 years worrying about Bill Clinton's
penis. What made you think they could run the country?

johnlawrencereed wrote:

Galileo discovered that all inertial objects fall at the same rate.
Since all things fall at the same rate from the same height,
regardless of their weight "mg", the Earth attractor accelerative
component "g" cannot be acting on mass.

Your last statement demonstrates that you're an idiot.

Thank you for demonstrating your status.

Goodbye.

John Anderson