, or because they rotate relative to the universe itself according to
Mach, or because they rotate relative to local
geodesics according to
general relativity. Historically, there have been differing views on the concept of absolute space and time.
Gottfried Leibniz was of the opinion that space made no sense except as the relative location of bodies, and time made no sense except as the relative movement of bodies.
George Berkeley suggested that, lacking any point of reference, a sphere in an otherwise empty universe could not be conceived to rotate, and a pair of spheres could be conceived to rotate relative to one another, but not to rotate about their center of gravity, an example later raised by
Albert Einstein in his development of general relativity. A more recent form of these objections was made by
Ernst Mach.
Mach's principle proposes that mechanics is entirely about relative motion of bodies and, in particular,
mass is an expression of such relative motion. So, for example, a single particle in a universe with no other bodies would have zero mass. According to Mach, Newton's examples simply illustrate relative rotation of spheres and the bulk of the universe. When, accordingly, we say that a body preserves unchanged its direction and velocity
in space, our assertion is nothing more or less than an abbreviated reference to
the entire universe.—Ernst Mach These views opposing absolute space and time may be seen from a modern stance as an attempt to introduce
operational definitions for space and time, a perspective made explicit in the special theory of relativity. Even within the context of Newtonian mechanics, the modern view is that absolute space is unnecessary. Instead, the notion of
inertial frame of reference has taken precedence, that is,
a preferred set of frames of reference that move uniformly with respect to one another. The laws of physics transform from one inertial frame to another according to
Galilean relativity, leading to the following objections to absolute space, as outlined by Milutin Blagojević: • The existence of absolute space contradicts the internal logic of classical mechanics since, according to Galilean principle of relativity, none of the inertial frames can be singled out. • Absolute space does not explain inertial forces since they are related to acceleration with respect to any one of the inertial frames. • Absolute space acts on physical objects by inducing their resistance to acceleration but it cannot be acted upon. Newton himself recognized the role of inertial frames. The motions of bodies included in a given space are the same among themselves, whether that space is at rest or moves uniformly forward in a straight line. As a practical matter, inertial frames often are taken as frames moving uniformly with respect to the
fixed stars. See
Inertial frame of reference for more discussion on this. ==Mathematical definitions==