wrote:
I think most know what I mean by inertial frame. If not then I hope
they speak up. Really quite clear.

Sorry parrot. You have tipped your hand you dont understand what you
are talking about. What you are talking about is at best
an approximate "law". WHich means it is not as hard and fast as you think
it is.

You try to claim something is "always true" and at the same time admit
it is not.

A neat demonstration -- I'm sure there are versions of YT these days --
was to hypnotise someone into accepting that a drawn figure
could at the same time be a square and a circle.

When hypnotised people will accept any old garbage as fact if they are
told it is a fact -- even a flat contradiction.

THe subject will look at the offered drawing and exclaim they suddenly
see how it is possible that it can be at the same time a square
and a circle. Why did they not see this before? It was so simple!

The next step is to get the subject to draw what they saw in the figure.

Give them a piece of paper and a pencil. And a couple erasers.

They typically first draw a square. Look at it. And decide there is
something wrong. They rub it out and draw a circle. Look at it.
Still not right. Still not what they think they saw in that figure.
They rub it out again and draw a square. Starting to get frustrated now.
ALSO NOT RIGHT! They rub it out and try ahain. A circle again.
&ct.

Now you know what you look like.