Phil Bouchard wrote:

Greg Neill wrote:

[...]

The Moon averages about 384400km from the Earth, or about
60 Earth radii. According to your theory then, time should
be moving faster at the distance of the Moon by a factor of
60^2, or 3600. How did the Apollo atronauts carry enough
food to make the trip? A two week journey translates into
about 138 years.


When multiple bodies are involved, measurements will be very different.
The "curved" spacetime GR suggests is identical from FR's gravitational
fields juxtaposition.

So FR is exactly like GR when it needs to be except that it is
completely different.

A geostationary orbit at an altitude of 35786km has an orbital
radius of about 6.6 Earth radii. So according to your theory,
they should experience a time dilation of about 44 times
faster than things down here on Earth.


Like I said before, FR needs considering the Sun's effects also and the
factor will be much less than 44 times.

In other words, you have no clue.

[...]

(i^2*j^2*(n^2*x^3-j*n^2*x^2-i*n^2*x^2+i*j*n^2*x-2*k^2*m^2*x+j*k^2*m^2+i*k^2*

m^2)) / ((i^2*j^2*n^2+j^2*k^2*m^2+i^2*k^2*m^2)v(x-i)*(x-j))

What are i,j,k,m,n, and just to be certain, x and v? What's the
frame of reference? What are the units?

Doug will not be able to provide the definitions of the variables
because you haven't posted them. Or, are you claiming that Doug
is a mind reader?


Science is plagiarized by definition so why should I post them here? x
is the finish line in meters and v is the speed of the object (c in case
of light) in meters per second.

So you have no clue what you mean.
[...]

There is no mention of the thought experiement regarding a
frame of reference tied to a photon as you suggeted there
was. You lied. You are a liar.


Einstein's rules are Einstein's own words. Let's not silently dismiss
what's written on the web page.

Except that you are lying and do not want to be called on it.

Which book? Which edition? That expression represents a
scaling factor, not a length.


"Relativity, The Special and General Theory" - fifteenth edition. It
represents indeed a scaling factor.

A scaling factor is not a length.

So are we to conclude that in your theory the Earth is stationary
at the center of the Universe?


Exactly.

Wrong again, phil. That is a very arrogant statement on your part.

Are the balls connected by the metal rod before they are
fired? If so, both balls must be fired at once, right?,
as they are rigidly conected. And the cannoneer has no
choice in the matter of setting a separate firing time for
each. The stationary observer will see the ensemble contract
in the direction of motion.


Ok. Consider the cannons being exactly 1 meter away from each other and
both cannonballs are fired at the exact same time. This cannot be clearer.

And it makes no difference. You have never understood what
relativity says.

No, I am not. It is a contradiction for you to claim that
aether entrainment both occurs and doesn't occur. If the Sun's
field cancels the effect, then it cannot be responsible for
MM's result. You're just trying to obfuscate things again.


Your statement is vague also.

Yes, we know you do not understand it.

We also note you are hiding from the fact that your FR misses
the gps corrections by a factor of a billion. FR is DOA.

[...]

Word salad. GR makes testable predictions. Those predictions
have been tested. So far GR's predictions have proven to be
correct, and to very high precision.


GR is a mapping of local observations and adjusted accordingly. FR is a
bottom - up theory.

[...]