# There's no such thing as *a free lunch * for Inertia.

There’s no such thing as ‘a free lunch’ for Inertia.
=.
Newton wrote:

• For the basic problem of philosophy seems to be to discover
the forces of nature from the phenomena of motions
and then to demonstrate the other phenomena from these forces*
=…
For the movement we must pay energy-money.
There isn’t inertia without force / energy.
Your car wouldn’t move even one inch without force /energy.
But Newtonian conception of inertia says nothing about the forces of inertia.
The idea of forces for * Inertia* was solved by Einstein.
In 1905 Einstein wrote paper:
“ Does the inertia of a body depend upon its energy content?"
As he realized the answer was:
“ Yes, the inertia depends on its energy E= Mc^2."
How can E=Mc^2 be responsible for inertial movement of quantum particle?
Nobody explains the details of such possibility of inertia movement.
Someone wrote:
“An old professor of mine used to say
that anyone who can answer that question
what inertia is, would win a Nobel Prize. “
=…
There's no such thing as 'a free lunch' for Inertia. =. Newton wrote: * For the basic problem of philosophy seems to be to discover the forces of nature from the phenomena of motions and then to demonstrate the other phenomena from these forces* =.. For the movement we must pay energy-money. There isn't inertia without force / energy. Your car wouldn't move even one inch without force /energy. But Newtonian conception of *inertia* says nothing about the forces of inertia. The idea of forces for * Inertia* was solved by Einstein. In 1905 Einstein wrote paper: “ Does the inertia of a body depend upon its energy content?" As he realized the answer was: “ Yes, the inertia depends on its energy E= Mc^2." How can E=Mc^2 be responsible for inertial movement of quantum particle? Nobody explains the details of such possibility of inertia movement. Someone wrote: “An old professor of mine used to say that anyone who can answer that question what inertia is, would win a Nobel Prize. “ =..
My high scool science teacher said it's the tendency of bodies at rest to stay at rest and for bodies in motion to stay in motion, or as Wikipedia says Inertia is the resistance of any physical object to any change in its state of motion, including changes to its speed and direction. In other words, it is the tendency of objects to keep moving in a straight line at constant linear velocity. The principle of inertia is one of the fundamental principles of classical physics that are used to describe the motion of objects and how they are affected by applied forces. Inertia comes from the Latin word, iners, meaning idle, sluggish. Inertia is one of the primary manifestations of mass, which is a quantitative property of physical systems. Does that mean my high school science teacher and Wikipedia desrve to share a Nobel Prize? If so, his name was Mr. Benkendorf if a nomination is in the offing. Lois
There's no such thing as 'a free lunch' for Inertia. =. Newton wrote: * For the basic problem of philosophy seems to be to discover the forces of nature from the phenomena of motions and then to demonstrate the other phenomena from these forces* =.. For the movement we must pay energy-money. There isn't inertia without force / energy. Your car wouldn't move even one inch without force /energy. But Newtonian conception of *inertia* says nothing about the forces of inertia. The idea of forces for * Inertia* was solved by Einstein. In 1905 Einstein wrote paper: “ Does the inertia of a body depend upon its energy content?" As he realized the answer was: “ Yes, the inertia depends on its energy E= Mc^2." How can E=Mc^2 be responsible for inertial movement of quantum particle? Nobody explains the details of such possibility of inertia movement. Someone wrote: “An old professor of mine used to say that anyone who can answer that question what inertia is, would win a Nobel Prize. “ =..
My high scool science teacher said it's the tendency of bodies at rest to stay at rest and for bodies in motion to stay in motion, Wikipedia says: Inertia is the resistance of any physical object to any change in its state of motion Does that mean my high school science teacher and Wikipedia desrve to share a Nobel Prize? If so, his name was Mr. Benkendorf if a nomination is in the offing. Lois the tendency of bodies at rest to stay at rest ( unchanging all the time !) and for bodies in motion to stay in motion ( unchanging all the time !) =. In other words your high school science teacher and Wkipedia said: " Inertia is a tendency to do nothing or to remain unchanged." It is contradict to the laws of Nature and Universe. Nature and the Universe are changeable. Therefore your high school science teacher and Wikipedia cannot deserve to share a Nobel Prize. ===..
There's no such thing as 'a free lunch' for Inertia. =. Newton wrote: * For the basic problem of philosophy seems to be to discover the forces of nature from the phenomena of motions and then to demonstrate the other phenomena from these forces* =.. For the movement we must pay energy-money. There isn't inertia without force / energy. Your car wouldn't move even one inch without force /energy. But Newtonian conception of *inertia* says nothing about the forces of inertia. The idea of forces for * Inertia* was solved by Einstein. In 1905 Einstein wrote paper: “ Does the inertia of a body depend upon its energy content?" As he realized the answer was: “ Yes, the inertia depends on its energy E= Mc^2." How can E=Mc^2 be responsible for inertial movement of quantum particle? Nobody explains the details of such possibility of inertia movement. Someone wrote: “An old professor of mine used to say that anyone who can answer that question what inertia is, would win a Nobel Prize. “ =..
My high scool science teacher said it's the tendency of bodies at rest to stay at rest and for bodies in motion to stay in motion, Wikipedia says: Inertia is the resistance of any physical object to any change in its state of motion Does that mean my high school science teacher and Wikipedia desrve to share a Nobel Prize? If so, his name was Mr. Benkendorf if a nomination is in the offing. Lois the tendency of bodies at rest to stay at rest ( unchanging all the time !) and for bodies in motion to stay in motion ( unchanging all the time !) =. In other words your high school science teacher and Wkipedia said: " Inertia is a tendency to do nothing or to remain unchanged." It is contradict to the laws of Nature and Universe. Nature and the Universe are changeable. Therefore your high school science teacher and Wikipedia cannot deserve to share a Nobel Prize. ===.. That's not what either my high school teacher or Wikipedia said. You are the only one to claim that they didn't say there are no other factors at work that would change the status. Lois

Inertia as to keep * the tendency of bodies at rest to stay at rest* or
the tendency . . . for bodies in motion to stay in motion means
" Inertia is a tendency to do nothing or to remain unchanged."
To keep the tendency . . . for bodies in motion to stay in motion
is needed force / energy.
2.
Wikipedia:
" Inertia is the resistance of any physical object
to any change in its state of motion . . .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertia
3.
We are deceiving ourselves using the word inertia as a clear idea.
===…

• We have seen that this law of inertia cannot be derived directly
from experiment, but only by speculative thinking consistent with
observation. The idealized experiment can never be actually
performed, although it leads to a profound understanding
of real experiments.*
/ Book: ‘ The Evolution of Physics ‘ page 9. By Einstein and Infeld. /
• In our idealized experiment the uniformity of the motion
was due to the absence of all external forces.*
/ Book: ‘ The Evolution of Physics ‘ page 10. By Einstein and Infeld. /
1
The inertia has no acceleration, no changes.
. . .but if the acceleration comes . . we have another situation . . .
2
Situation 1 – Classic physics says acceleration comes from outside,
from external forces.
Situation 2 - There isn’t any external forces . . but . . only (!)
as Einstein wrote: the inertia depends on E=Mc^2 (!)
/ “ Does the inertia of a body depend upon its energy content? " /
Conclusion:
we must think a little more deeply in SRT and in E=Mc^2.
==.
To keep *the tendency . . . for bodies in motion to stay in motion* is needed force / energy. We are deceiving ourselves using the word *inertia* as a clear idea. ===..
You're the one who is confused about this. Can you get it through your head that space has no friction, therefore a body in motion in space will remain in constant motion until acted upon by an outside force.

Today the inertial movement is taken as a fact, as a reality.
But in our earth-gravity conditions this motion doesn’t work.
Therefore I say: There’s no such thing as *a free lunch * for Inertia.
Why I need forces for inertia?
==…
Inertia:
Inertia is a tendency to do nothing or to remain unchanged.
Inertia is ’ attempt to keep its state intact’.
Inertia is a tendency to be ‘inviolable’.
Inertia is ’ a virgin state’.
Inertia is ‘a scientific spirit in movement’
God kicked an " unknown (!) amount of matter" in inertial movement.
#.

• We have seen that this law of inertia cannot be derived directly
from experiment, but only by speculative thinking . . . . . *
• In our idealized experiment the uniformity of the motion
was due to the absence of all external forces.*
/ Book: ‘ The Evolution of Physics ‘ pages 9- 10. By Einstein and Infeld /

I need forces for inertia because inertia is speculative thinking,
because inertia is an un-adapted motion in the Nature.
Such scientific view contradicts the character of Nature.
There isn’t movement without forces.
If you don’t think speculatively and inertia isn’t a scientific spirit ,
but an " amount of unknown matter" then must be reason of its motion.
=…
My peasant’s conclusion:
If you want to understand reality - don’t think speculatively.
==…