Re: [Phys-l] inertial +- gravitational mass

[John Denker <jsd@av8n.com>]

On 11/20/2006 01:56 PM, Hugh Haskell wrote:

> and they are at least a little prepared for the additional 
> complexity introduced by the fact that electrical mass is not the 
> same as inertial mass.
.         ^^^^^^^^


I hope that's a typo;  previously the correspondence was
  electrical mass <--> gravitational mass
which made more sense.

Typos aside, I'm not endorsing that approach, but /if/ you are wedded
to that approach, here is a constructive suggestion:  Rather than
introducing the idea of electrical mass, go the other way:

    electricity                  gravity

    inertial mass             inertial mass            (or just "mass")

    electrical charge         gravitational charge
                              (conventionally called
                              gravitational mass)


This is more-nearly-standard terminology.  It is conventional in
many areas to speak of the field-coupling parameter as a generalized
charge, e.g. the "color charge" in quantum chromodynamics.