$ Wicked acceleration.
GR-c goes "instantaneously" from 0 to c ..in NO time.!!
But jOE, Tom Roberts says LiGHT "STOPs slowing down".!!

[ Does SPEED c "STOP slowing down" instantaneously.? ]
[ Does SPEED c "STOP slowing down" ..automatically.? ]

[ Does VELOCiTY c "STOP slowing down" instantaneously.? ]
[ Does VELOCiTY c "STOP slowing down" ..automatically.? ]

Does LiGHT "STOP slowing down" instantaneously automatically.?!!
brian a m stuckless

Joe Fischer wrote: On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 15:00:04 +1100, "em"
nootlanoo@dodiggerdo wrote: "N:dlzc
Dear em:
... when/if it is fact.
A lot of effort and energy has been expended to find limitations
and/or error with GR. To date none has been found.

That is good enough for me. I'll I'll put my money on WEP EEP
and GR and declare them absolute.

Isn't relativity meant to replace "absolute". :-)

It would have to be expanding on very large scales, to avoid
detection.
And any such expansion would not be a Loretnz aether.

If every Aetheric particle in the universe was simultaneously
expanding at the same rate, in such manner that all rulers and
units of measure, even the wave length of light would also have
to be effected by this expansion.

Right, and this is one of the things about Divergent
Matter that I like, even though I have no interest at all in
Special Relativity.

I study Divergent Matter as both a model for gravity,
and as a model to make many different processes part of a pattern
rather than haphazard.

If the propagation of light was indeed mediated by say the
propagation of a longitudinal vacuum wave then as the particles
of Aether increased in size, so too would the frequency of any
event be automatically carried with it.

There is no aether, and none is needed. --

insert HERE ..see top of PAGE.!!

-- Because of the fact that light appears to instantly
"travel" at c when it is emitted, --

$ Wicked acceleration.
GR-c goes "instantaneously" from 0 to c ..in NO time.!!
But jOE, Tom Roberts says LiGHT "STOPs slowing down".!!

[ Does SPEED c "STOP slowing down" instantaneously.? ]
[ Does SPEED c "STOP slowing down" ..automatically.? ]

[ Does VELOCiTY c "STOP slowing down" instantaneously.? ]
[ Does VELOCiTY c "STOP slowing down" ..automatically.? ]

Does LiGHT "STOP slowing down" instantaneously automatically.?!!

-- the expansion on matter resulting in a lengthening meter
and a lengthening unit of time, light could "travel" farther in
succeeding seconds, but would still retain the same frequency and
wavelength to "current" meters and seconds.

But the real kicker is that the longer second, allowing
light to "travel" farther each succeeding second would mean that
the "speed" of light would always be measured as c, --

GR VELOCiTY c is AUTOMATiC.!!
GR VELOCiTY c is iNSTANTANEOUS.!!
GR VELOCiTY c is AUTOMATiCALLY iNSTANTANEOUS.!!

GR SPEED c is AUTOMATiC.!!
GR SPEED c is iNSTANTANEOUS.!!
GR SPEED c is AUTOMATiCALLY iNSTANTANEOUS.!!

-- AND that _nothing_ having mass that must accelerate could
ever "travel" as fast as light.

Only LiGHT "travels", AUTOMATiCALLY, iNSTANTANEOUSLY.!!

So the expanding matter (Divergent Matter) model absolutely
requires that c is --

..AUTOMATiCALLY, iNSTANTANEOUSLY, ...

-- a limiting velocity.

No, it is not the Lorentz Aether, (nor Einstein's either), --

Leave "EinsteiN's either" OUT of this, jOE.!!

-- but then again if Lorentz had of completed the task of unmasking
the Aether, everybody would have yelled, 'BINGO.'

There is no aether, why mention it.

"AEther", "either", "ether", He der ..iAMbient media gradient.!!
*Disbelief* is the SiMPLiST form of virtual "objectification".!!

I am thinking more the geodesic is not caused by a physical
curvature of space more so the expansion of space itself and
the earth racing up to met it.

The "geodesic" is simply an object following through
on it's present motion and proceeding in inertial motion without
any interaction of any kind. "Space" has no attributes and
needs none, the distance between objects changes, and that makes
it appear as if space had an attribute of length on 3 axes.

That is why the concept of "attraction" due to gravity
has no place in physics.

Explain an "attraction" of TWO different POiNTs on a WORLD-line.
Explain an "attraction" of POiNTs, on TWO different WORLD-lines.

What is "simultaneity" for TWO different POiNTs on a TiME-line.?
What is "simultaneity" for POiNTs, on TWO different TiME-lines.?

Joe Fischer

Brian, it must have been terrible to have gotten no attention when you
were young. I sincerely hope that this forum of sci.physics is
remedying this situation, and some day that thy soul shall be healed.

- Rupert

brian a m stuckless wrote: