I have always been taught that weight is the force exerted in a gravitational field and mass is what you are calling inertial mass. Why do we need the additional specification of inertial mass when there is already terminology that differentiates these two things. Or is it just preference. Was cool to see how to determine mass in 0G.
You can just retake AP Physics 1 or AP Physics 2. It's pretty much the same material as in Physics B, but more in depth. You probably don't even have to study much. :)
Is the m in F=ma the same kind of m as the m in E=mc² or E=√((mc²)²+pc²)? Is relativistic mass more inertial, gravitational or it's own completely separate thing? I could look this up to refresh my memory, but I felt it was a good question to put out before a few minutes on wikipedia turned into a few hours for the umpteenth time.
I suspect the relationship between inertial mass, gravitational mass and relativistic mass are far more interesting than one person could spend an entire life uncovering, but I guess what I'm after is a neat package explanation that, while being concise, leaves the doors open for further inquiry.
It's a bit misleading to say that leaving the hanging mass constant also means you are keeping "the net force the same" when you change the cart mass. The weight of the hanging mass is constant, but the tension in the string (the net force on the cart) depends on the mass of the cart. For example, if the hanging mass was tied to an extremely massive cart, the tension in the string would indeed be very nearly equal to the weight of the hanging mass. However, as the cart's mass decreases, the tension in the string would too. If the cart were replaced with a cotton ball, the tension in the string would be nearly zero. For this experiment to work for a variety of masses, it would be better to attach the spring to a force sensor mounted on the cart. Then you can measure the applied force directly.
