As a physics student I have never been informed that gravity is a fictitious force.
So are you familiar with the equivalence principle or not. This certainly seems damning if you wish to claim you are.
The equivalence principle can be defined perfectly well without using the words "fictitious force". Like so:
Equivalence principle, fundamental law of physics that states that gravitational and inertial forces are of a similar nature and often indistinguishable. In the Newtonian form it asserts, in effect, that, within a windowless laboratory freely falling in a uniform gravitational field, experimenters would be unaware that the laboratory is in a state of nonuniform motion. All dynamical experiments yield the same results as obtained in an inertial state of uniform motion unaffected by gravity. This was confirmed to a high degree of precision by an experiment conducted by the Hungarian physicist Roland Eötvös. In Einstein’s version, the principle asserts that in free-fall the effect of gravity is totally abolished in all possible experiments and general relativity reduces to special relativity, as in the inertial state.
https://www.britannica.com/science/equivalence-principle
What's funny though is how you would apparently rather pick away at potential small gaps in other people's terminology than say anything more about your revolutionary scientific breakthrough that you have convinced several physics professors is the correct interpretation.
I'd have thought the later would make for a vastly more interesting conversation. Who cares about grilling Solarwind on boring old established physics?
And what is an inertial force synonym of? Oh right. Fictitious force. Which he says he understands.
I'm not grilling him on physics, though I would say its rather important to understand your own point of view. I'm trying to communicate with him, and to do so we need to establish a shared vocabulary. He says he understands what I'm saying, but it's clear he does not.
If he did, since he claims to know what a fictitious force is, and claims to know what the equivalence principle states, he would clearly know the equivalence in the equivalence principle is between gravitational and inertial forces. Furthermore, its clear you don't since you don't know "inertial force" is a word like "fictitious force."
Maybe you should understand the view you are trying to argue is correct before coming to our house, shitting on the carpet and claiming we are wrong. I'd love to talk about my work. You seem to want to argue that you don't need a shared understanding of words to talk though. Which, I think even you can admit, is rather silly.