From: helbig@asclothestro.multivax.de   
      
   In article ,   
   Richard Livingston  writes:   
      
   > On Sunday, January 1, 2023 at 10:01:21 AM UTC-6, Phillip Helbig (undress to   
   reply) wrote:   
   > ....   
   > > Imagine a completely empty universe. Would there still be inertia? If   
   > > one argues that there wouldn't be, because there is nothing acceleration   
   > > could be relative to, would that change if one introduced one or more   
   > > other bodies of arbitrarily small mass? If one then observes the   
   > > expected inertia, how can that be due to arbitrarily small masses? One   
   > > might argue that that would lead to a small amount of inertia and adding   
   > > more and more mass in the form of other bodies would increase inertia.   
   > > ...   
   >   
   > Actually, combining simple ideas from QM and SR give us momentum:   
      
   We can imagine the limits h-->0 and c-->.  Would there still be inertia   
   in such cases?   
      
   > I don't think we need to invoke the mass of the universe to explain   
   > inertia, unless it is that mass that generates the Minkowski   
   > space-time geometry.   
      
   I think that that is the motivation of most people who invoke Mach's   
   principle.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)