# Thread: coriolis effect : its implication

1. guys this thread is only for genuine inquiry and not for any debate.

Coriolis effect says: In the inertial frame of reference, an object moves in a straight line. However, the observer who is standing in the rotating/non-inertial frame of reference, sees the object as following a curved path due to the Coriolis and centrifugal forces present in this frame.

now lets apply the rule into our skyline at horizon.

rotating frame = earth

object = skyline at horizon

observer = us

because of earth's rotation we see our skyline at horizon curved which actually is a straight line. is it true?

2.

3. an object moves in a straight line.

Operative word is moves.

4. Originally Posted by xxx200
Coriolis effect says: In the inertial frame of reference, an object moves in a straight line.
...
object = skyline at horizon
This is not an object and it isn't moving.

because of earth's rotation we see our skyline at horizon curved which actually is a straight line. is it true?
The horizon is curved because we are on a sphere. (This curvature is barely visible at sea level, though.)

5. but would it mean that due to coriolis effect, all moving objects whom we see moving in curvature actually move in straight line ?

6. Originally Posted by xxx200
but would it mean that due to coriolis effect, all moving objects whom we see moving in curvature actually move in straight line ?
Not necessarily. (I don't know if your description of the Coriolis effect is accurate or not, but this is purely a problem of logic.)

If something actually moving in a straight line is seen to move in a curve DOES NOT imply that all things seen to be moving in a curve must actually be moving in a straight line.

For example, if something is actually moving in a curve then it will be perceived to be moving in a curve.

To put it more formally:

IF A THEN B is not the same as IF B THEN A

7. Originally Posted by xxx200
but would it mean that due to coriolis effect, all moving objects whom we see moving in curvature actually move in straight line ?
The "skyline" is still technically the Earth, so the observer and the skyline are within the same reference frame so we do not observe a corriolis effect (as someone else said, we see a curvature because the Earth is curved).

8. Ιf I take the motorway to anywhere I follow what appears to me as a straight line this is my inertial frame of reference.However if an observer looked at the car on the motorway in the rotating frame of reference not in the car they would see it follow a curve.Therefore the object follow an apparently different path relative to each observer. Now why would this be a problem if I looked at lightning in two different reference frames I would find differing results for how far away the lighting is how do I know how far away the lightning really was?

 Bookmarks
##### Bookmarks
 Posting Permissions
 You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts   BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On [VIDEO] code is On HTML code is Off Trackbacks are Off Pingbacks are Off Refbacks are On Terms of Use Agreement