On Feb 9, 7:53 pm, rbwinn wrote:

OK, so you do not believe Kepler had a number.

I didn't say whether I believed Kepler had a number of not.
I asked you what number you were referring to.

Kepler thought that he
did. It was R^3/T^2 = 3.353, more or less.

OK, that's a number. What about it?

Newton used Kepler's number in his equation for the centripetal force
on a planet.

No, Newton didn't "use Kepler's number". Newton
proved why R and T have this relation from more fundamental
considerations.

Now I don't know what you are saying about welding.

I'm asking you what theory you want to talk about.

(1) Newton's theory, which would be the theory that, you know,
was Newton's. I will only insist on sticking to Newton physics
if you say that we are having a "pure Newtonian" discussion.
That would be what is implied by the words "Newtonian"
and "pure".

(2) GR, where time is affected by gravitational potential
and orbits are geodesics, or

(3) Some theory where you have welded GR results with
Newtonian equations, which is neither GR nor Newton but
a hybrid monster, and possibly not drivable.

I'm happy to talk about one, but you have to pick. Don't
say you're talking about (1) and then immediately switch
to (3).

You have some question about the GR effect of time
and gravitational fields. So we're in either (2) or
(3). Which is it, and what's your question?

- Randy