[Physics] What distinguished physical and pseudo-forces

forcesnewtonian-mechanicsreference frames

Why are some forces are considered pseudo-forces while some are considered real or physical forces?

The definition of pseudo-forces that I know of is that they exist in noninertial reference frames but don't exist in inertial reference frames. Among other arguments is that they don't have an identifiable source.

However, a person certainly "feels" the pseudo-force such as in a car that is rounding a corner. How can it be proved, then, that the centrifugal force is not a real force? Why isn't what is "real" determined by the non-inertial reference frame?

Best Answer

Real forces satisfy two fundamental requisites

  1. They do not depend on the reference frame

  2. They satisfy the third law of classical dynamics

Pseudoforces violate both requirements. Indeed, they appear only in some reference frames called, non-inertial in addition to real forces and they are added just to impose the validity of $\vec{F}=m\vec{a}$ also in those reference frames. Secondly, all real forces always arise in pairs in the Newtonian formulation of mechanics: the body B exerts a force $\vec{F}$ on the body A and simultaneously the body A exerts the force $-\vec{F}$ on the body B. If $\vec{F}$ is a pseudoforce acting on $A$, there is no $B$ and there is no $-\vec{F}$ acting on it.

(I stress that the notion of pseudoforce is proper of Newton's formulation of classical mechanics. When passing to more general relativistic formulations, that distinction between forces and pseudoforces is not so sharp also because the language is different, and pseudoforces share the same geometric nature of the gravitational interaction: they are no longer "forces". So that it is difficult to directly compare the two scenarios.)

Related Question