Comment on "On Mach's critique of Newton and Copernicus"

TL;DR

This paper critiques Hartman and Nissim-Sabat's objections to Mach's ideas on the relativity of rotation, defending Mach's position against claims of inconsistency and observational distinguishability.

Contribution

It provides a detailed rebuttal to objections against Mach's theory, clarifying the conceptual and observational aspects of rotational relativity.

Findings

Hartman and Nissim-Sabat's objections are addressed and countered.

Mach's concept of rotational relativity remains consistent and unobservable distinction is defended.

The paper clarifies the theoretical and observational implications of Mach's ideas.

Abstract

Hartman and Nissim-Sabat have argued that Mach's idea of the relativity of rotational motion suffers from internal inconsistencies and leads to a contradiction that there cannot be a stationary bucket in a rotating universe. They also claimed that non-inertial electromagnetic and stellar aberration observations can distinguish between a rotating and a stationary universe, whereas according to Mach there cannot be any observable way to distinguish these two cases. We contest these objections.