GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE INERTIA

What a wonderful phenomenon we see in everyday life and call it the inertia? When at the normal conditions we push the body being in the state of quiescence on the surface of the solid phase of the planet, it begins the motion, but gradually slows down. This phenomenon is most easily to observe on example of the solid bodies, not heated to the combustion temperature. However, and liquid, and gaseous, and burning bodies behave in a similar manner - after pushing they move gradually slowing.

Two of the founder of classical mechanics - Galileo Galilei and Isaac Newton played the main role in the study of inertia.

In the modern understanding of the meaning of this phenomenon a considerable confusion exists.

Galileo and Newton considered the inertia as the ability of bodies or stay at quiescence in the composition of the celestial body (on the surface), or save the state of "straight" and uniform motion. But at the same, in the formulation of the Law of Inertia Newton as a compulsory condition for the manifestation of inertia called the "absence of action of external forces". As we know, he attributed to the forces including the Force of Attraction (for example, the Force of Gravity of the planet). The absence of any whatsoever "external forces" (including the Force of Attraction) is possible only under ideal conditions, i.e. in a totally empty space. Here lies the main "disconnect" in the current formulation of the Law of Inertia. Of what kind of "quiescence" of the body did Galileo and Newton want to talk - the absolute, which is possible only under ideal conditions, or about the quiescence, caused by the action of Attraction Field of the planet? Indeed, if in a totally empty space there is only one body (no matter what, in any aggregate state), then it’s true, we could talk about the complete absence of external influences on it. The Fields of Attraction and Repulsion of other bodies would carry away it nowhere; other bodies in motion would not push it. And the body might be there in a totally empty space in a state of absolute quiescence. This "quiescence" is real. But the "quiescence" of the body, which is the result of its fixation by the Field of Attraction of the celestial body, of which it is part, we can not to consider as a true "quiescence".

Both scientists as the measure of inertia of bodies consider their mass. The more the mass of the body is, the greater the ability to inertia it should have. I.e. the heavier the body, the more it will resist that it moved up and set in motion, and the longer it will stay in the motion if it already moving. But is it all just easy as it seems, and is everything explained right? In fact, the interpretation of this phenomenon by modern physics - is a puzzle to understand that we offer you with us.

In modern mechanics to the phenomenon of inertia scientists tend to include almost any case when the body is "no hurry" to stop its movement. For example, when a body is caused to rotate or move in a circle, and then it is not stopped immediately, this fact is explained by inertia (we just add that it's quite true). But at the same time, scientists-mechanics tend to "no retreat" of the wording of the Law of Inertia, which was proposed by Newton. And so to the pure manifestations of inertia they referred in the first place, all cases in which the body is difficult to set in motion, as well as all cases when the body is difficult to stop its "straight" movement on the surface of the planet (the quotes are delivered because when the body is moving, for example, on the road laid on the surface of a celestial body it is impossible to talk about the straightness). Thus, in modern mechanics despite the absence of debate and controversy, there is no one idea of ​​what to understand of inertia. Although it is believed that everything is in order.

What we are going to understand of "inertia"? Or resistance of the body to other bodies that tend or to move it, or to stop its movement along the surface of the planet in a straight (there this word is not in quotes, as Galileo and Newton conducted experiments on inertia on smooth surfaces) trajectory. Galileo and Newton understood inertia just so.

Either we mean by "inertia" a quite another - namely, the ability to self-renewable movement, i.e. when we talk about the ability of the bodies just to save the state of movement. This ability has something in common with the existing in physics the "Law of conservation of impulse" – i.e. while the body preserves some unbeknownst impulse, it will move (no matter in what direction, it can constantly change it) and report this impulse to other bodies in a collision with them. Impulse as known is the multiplication of mass and velocity of the body. Please note - all of the same multiplication of mass and velocity, which we find in the formula of Force (F = ma), kinetic energy (T = mυ²/2) and Energy (Einstein's formula – E = mc²).

From the practical experience we know that the heavier the body is, the harder it is to move it off or change the direction of its movement, if it is already moving. Exactly such bodies, on the representations of classical mechanics, are the most inert. Thus it is possible to evaluate not only the inertness of solid bodies but also those which are at the normal conditions in the liquid or gaseous state, and even burning. However, because the liquid and gaseous bodies easily deformed and broken when moving through other bodies and mediums, their inertia is easiest to examine enclosing them in a hard shell.

In order to find out what lies in the basis of inertia of the bodies, in the first turn we should find out whether this phenomenon is typical for elementary particles.

And the answer is Yes.

Yes, inertia inherent to elementary particles. And not just inherent, and it is with them we should begin to study this phenomenon, because the bodies are composed of chemical elements, which in turn are composed of particles.

Inertia of elementary particle - is its ability to maintain a state of motion, despite the fact that the impact with which the particle has been led to a state of motion, is already absence. This is the whole essence of the concept of “inertia”. But why is the particle continues to move even after the external factor that led her to move, stopped the impact? And does every particle, regardless of its quality is capable to inertial motion?

At the heart of the inertial motion of the particles lies the occurrence in the particles of the Force of Inertia. And the Law of Transformation accompanies the inertia, namely, the transformation by the movement relative to ethereal field.

In whatever conditions inertial movement of the particle happens - in real or ideal - it must begin with the fact that some particle has led the particle to the state of motion. Ether of ethereal field with respect to which the particle moves, is excessive for it. Ethereal field presses on the Ether filling the particle. It enters into the front hemisphere of the particle. As a result, in the front hemisphere of the particle, in the Zone of Destruction, there is the destruction of external Ether instead of its own, born in it.

Ether of ethereal field through which the particle moves, passing through the particle changes the outward manifestation of its quality. This passing through the particle "excessive" Ether fully or partially "deprives" the particle of the Field of Attraction. Will be this deliverance complete or partial, depends on the velocity of the particle. The greater the speed is, the smaller the Field of Attraction and the greater the likelihood that there will be a Field of Repulsion. If the particle had a Field of Repulsion, its value increases. Particles with Fields of Attraction their value decreases only in the rear hemisphere (rear – on the direction of motion). And if there a Field of Repulsion arises, it also manifests only in the rear hemisphere. Particles with Fields of Repulsion their magnitude also increases only behind. Again, the higher the speed is with which the particle has been led in motion, the larger the magnitude of the Field of Repulsion that arises.

Decrease of the Field of Attraction or its replacement by a Field of Repulsion (at the particles Yin), or increase of the Field of repulsion (at the particles Yang) occurs because Ether of ethereal field passing through the periphery of the particle (where its destruction occurs), becomes for a particle excessive. If the speed of entering of Ether is greater than the speed of destruction of, the particle begins to emit its own created Ether - a Field of Repulsion appears at a particle (or enhanced if it already has it).

Why is possible an inertial motion at all?

And now actually about why a particle shifts forward relative to Ether emitted by it backward.

Under ideal conditions, the particle with the Field of Repulsion emits Ether uniformly over its entire surface. Just because of the existence of this balance between all points of the surface the particle is at quiescence on the place and does not shift at any of the sides.

In a state of inertial motion we conventionally divide the particle on 2 hemispheres - front and rear. Due to the fact that after the initial push the particle shifts relative to the ethereal field, Ether presses on the front hemisphere, and it can not emit Ether. Balance is disturbed. The front hemisphere does not emit anything, and the rear – the twice dose. Ether coming from the rear hemisphere simultaneously repels the particle itself and the surrounding Ether. This causes the particle to move in the direction where its front hemisphere "looks".