Speed of Stationary Objects, Stellar data analysis, Stellar clock/time
Speed of Stationary object

If you are standing with both feet on the ground in front of your house, how far did you and your house move in the
past 24 hours? Are you going:

A - 0 Miles Per Hour
B - up to 1,000 Miles Per Hour
C - both A and B
D - 67,000 plus or minus 1,000 Miles Per Hour
F - all of the above.

The correct answer is F.

Logically, you must think that is absurd.  There isn’t any way for a person to be standing still with both feet firmly on
the ground, in front of their house and still be moving.  Would it help you deal with the question if I said that you
and your house are standing on the equator or on the north pole?  We all know that the earth is spinning around
it's axis.  At the equator, the rate of rotation is about 1,000 MPH.  At the poles,  the rotation is zero.  At about 40
degree north or south, the speed is about 750 MPH.  

Now think about the question with that additional information.  If you are standing on the equator, with both feet on
the ground, in front of your house, at sea level, holding some test equipment, how fast are you going?  

It should be easy to understand that C is obviously a correct answer if you include the words describing the relative
point of reference.  For answer A, relative to the ground, you are moving 0 mph.  For answer B, relative to the center
of the earth, you are moving about 1,000 mph.  That is because the surface of the earth, at sea level, at the equator
is moving about 1,000 mph relative to the center of the earth.  Note that I said “at sea level”.  If you were on the
top floor of 10 story building, the distance from the center of the earth to the 10 floor of the building is greater than
the distance at sea level. Since the distance is greater, the circumference of the circle is greater which results in a
greater distance to go in the same amount of time which results in a greater speed for the person standing on the
10th floor of the building with some test equipment.  

A person standing at 40 degree north or south is moving at about 750 mph relative to the center of the earth while
a person standing at the north or south pole is moving 0 mph relative to the center of the earth as well as 0 mph
relative to the surface of the earth.  Suppose we have 4 people, with the same type of test equipment, who are
standing at the 4 main points I described; one at sea level at the equator, one on the 10 floor of a building at sea
level on the equator, one at 40 degree north and one at the north pole.  Now suppose the 4 people can see each
other and they can see each other’s test equipment.  All 4 will say that they are all moving 0 mph relative to each
other and to the surface of the earth and to the test equipment. However; we also know that three of the people
and their test equipment are moving at three different speeds relative to the center of the earth.  In one hour, the
person on the north pole will simply rotate.  The person at 40 degree north will move about 750 miles while the
person at the equator will move about 1,000 miles and the person with test equipment on the 10th floor will move a
little more than the person on the ground.  

Relative to the center of the earth and the surface of the earth, the following table summarizes the relative MPH and
distance moved in a day and a year at different points on the earth.



Point of reference        Location of person               MPH          Miles moved in a day         Miles moved in a year

Earth surface               north pole                            0               0                                        0
Earth surface               41 degree north                   0              0
Earth surface               equator                                0               0                                        0

Center of the earth        north pole                          0               0                                        0
Center of the earth        41 degree north                783           18,792                                6,863,778
Center of the earth        equator                             1,038        24,912                                9,099,108


Now we should return to the original question.   We still have answer D to address. It says: 67,000 plus or minus
1,000 Miles Per Hour.  Most people know that it takes just over 365 days for the earth to go around the sun.  Some
people know the earth is moving at a speed of about 67,000 mph as it goes around the sun.

With that additional information, it should be easy for most people to understand that they are riding on the earth
that is moving at a speed of about 67,000 mph relative to the sun while they are moving 0 mph relative to the
surface of the earth. It should also be easy for people to understand that they are also moving up to 1,000 mph
relative to the center of the earth.  It takes a little more explanation to address the difference between the night
time speed vs the day time speed.  Since the earth is spinning while it goes around the sun, the speed of a point on
the earth surface is going with the direction of the earth’s movement half of the time and it is going against the
direction of the earth’s movement the other half of the time. Hence, the speed of a person relative to the sun being
67,000 mph plus or minus up to 1,000 mph. It is important to note that the speed of the point on earth relative to
the sun is either accelerating or decelerating as it proceeds from dusk to dawn.  The maximum addition or
subtraction is at the middle of the day and night.  The minimum addition or subtraction is near dusk and dawn. This
is basic information that should be easily understood by everybody.  In the past it was hard to convenience anyone
that the earth is moving.  Today the earth’s movement is readily accepted.

Now it should be easy for anyone to understand that a person, standing next to some test equipment, someplace
on earth, is moving 0 mph relative to the point on the surface of the earth where they are standing, as well as up to
about 1,000 mph relative to the center of the earth, and about 67,000 mph plus or minus about 1,000 mph relative
to the sun.   That means, anyone who is reading this while they are standing or sitting on earth is moving a distance
of about 67,000 miles per hour plus about 1,000 miles per hour.  In a day, they move a distance of about 1,608,000
miles plus about 24,000 miles for a total of about 1,632,000 miles.  If you eat at the same place on Monday and then
went back on Tuesday, you will have traveled over one and a half a million miles between lunch on the two days.  If
the person was standing next to some test equipment, the equipment is also moving the same speed and has
covered the same distance in one day.  

Relative to the sun, the center of the earth and the surface of the earth, the following table summarizes the relative
MPH and distance moved in a day and a year at different points on the earth.


Point of reference        Location of person               MPH          Miles moved in a day        Miles moved in a year

Earth surface               north pole                            0               0                                       0
Earth surface               41 degree north                   0              0
Earth surface               equator                                0               0                                       0

Center of the earth      north pole                           0               0                                        0
Center of the earth      41 degree north                 783           18,792                               6,863,778
Center of the earth      equator                              1,038         24,912                              9,099,108

Center of the Sun        north pole                           67,000       1,608,000                        587,322,000
Center of the Sun        41 degree north                  67,000       1,626,792                        594,185,778
Center of the Sun        equator                               67,000       1,632,912                        596,421,108


Now lets consider sound.  Suppose some people are in a box on the equator at sea level and the temperature is 59
degrees Fahrenheit and one person talks to another person. Since the box is at the equator it is going about 239
mph faster than the speed of sound, will the second person be able to hear the first person talking?  How can the
people in the box hear each other since they are going faster than the speed of sound? The speed of the sound in
the box is relative to the box.  Hence; relative to the surface of the earth, they are not moving while they are
talking.  However; relative to the center of the sun, they are moving 67,000 MPH which is about 88 times the speed
of sound. From this we see that the speed of sound is relative.  So, relative to the surface of the earth, the speed
the sound, in the box with people and test equipment inside, is about 761 mph. However; relative to the center of
the earth, the speed of sound in the box is between, 1,761 mph and a minus -239 mph. Relative to the sun, the
sound is moving at about 67,761, plus or minus up to about 1,000 mph.  That shows that the variation in the speed
of the test equipment and the speed of sound relative to the sun is greater that the speed of sound relative to the
surface of the earth.  

Now let’s suppose a person, with some test equipment, is riding on a train that is going 100 mph.  How fast is that
person moving relative to the sun?  The answer to that question depends upon the direction of the train and the
time of night or day.  

That person will be going some variable speed between 67,000 mph plus or minus 1,000 mph plus or minus 100
mph. That gives a variable speed of the person riding a train moving 100 mph some where between 65,900 mph
and 68,100 mph. That is because the speeds are additive relative to the sun. The 67,000 mph speed of the earth
moving around the sun plus or minus the accelerating or decelerating speed of the surface of the earth as it goes
between dusk and dawn plus or minus the speed of the train gives us up to 2,200 mph difference in the variable
speed.

Now let’s suppose there is a bowling alley on the train and the person is about to roll the bowling ball.  Suppose the
person walks at 5 mph and rolls the ball at 45 mph.  How fast is the ball going relative to the sun?  The ball is
accelerating or decelerating somewhere between 65,850 and 68,150 mph relative to the sun.  That is because all
the speeds are additive and the speed of a point on the earth’s surface is changing speed as it moves between
dusk and dawn.  Although the point in space where the person rolled the ball remains constant, the bowling pin are
moving with the train and the surface of the earth relative to it’s movement around the sun. The time it takes for the
ball to arrive at the pins remains constant although the distance the ball moves is considerable greater than the
length of the bowling alley on the train.  The distance from the person who rolls the ball to the pins relative to the
train remains fixed while that distance relative to the sun is very great and is variable depending upon the time of
day and direction of the train.

Remember the test equipment I keep mentioning.  Now suppose a person is conducting an experiment to determine
the speed of light while riding on a train going 1,000 mph. on the surface of the earth that is moving at some
accelerating or decelerating speed up to 1,000 mph somewhere between dusk and dawn and the earth is moving
67,000 mph around the sun and those speeds are additive.  We have also already determined that the speeds of
moving objects on the train are additive to the speed of the train relative to the sun. We know the distance
between points A and B on the train are constantly moving at a greater speed or a lesser speed relative to the sun
while they remain constant relative to the train.  Suppose two virtually identical tables are setup similar to the tables
used in the Michelson-Morley experiment.  It is an example of measuring the speed of light at 186,300 miles per
second using a table that could turn to check the speed going different direction and always gives the same result.  
In their experiments the table was riding on the surface of the earth that is moving.  We simply add the condition of
the experiment being on the train that is moving at 1,000 mph on earth that is rotating at while it is going around
the sun. We use two tables that are geared to test the speed of light in opposite directions at the same time.

How fast is the speed of light on each table on the moving train on the spinning earth that is going around the sun?
We have already established that the answer is relative to a point of reference.  Relative to the train, both tables
are going 0 mph and the light on both tables is going 186,300 mps. Relative to the surface of the earth, the tables
are on the train that is moving 1,000 mph so the lights on the tables is going 186,300 mps plus and minus 1,000
mph for the speed of the train. That is because one table will test the speed of light going with the train while the
other table will test the speed of light going against the speed of the train. Relative to the center of the earth, the
tables are on the train that is moving on the surface of the earth. So, we have 186,300 mps for the speed of light on
the tables plus and minus 1,000 mph for the speed of the train plus and minus 1,000 mph for the speed of the
earth's rotation. That gives us a speed of light that is accelerating or decelerating between 186,300 mps plus and
minus 2,000 mph. Also, relative to the sun, the tables are moving with the train that is moving with the earth as it
spins and goes around the sun. That makes the speed of light on each table 186,300 mps plus and minus 67,000
mph for the speed of the earth going around the sun and plus and minus 1,000 mph for the speed of the earth at
the equator and plus and minus 1,000 mph for the speed of the train.

In the theory of relativity, it says w=c-v which means the speed of light in the frame is additive to the frame to get
the speed of light relative to the frame of reference. That formula comes from the train thought experiment using
man walking on a moving train. In that example, the speed of the walking man on the train is additive to the speed
of the train resulting in a relative ground speed.  Then the speed of walking man is replaced with the speed of light
to get the speed of light on the train relative to the ground.  My example simply takes a known actual experiment
and puts it on a train.  The outcome is the same for the experiment regardless of the use of addition of the train.  

Every experiment to measure the speed of light under identical conditions has consistently given the same constant
speed of light on earth. The location or orientation or speed of the moving test equipment has not changed the
outcome.  The speed of light relative to the earth or any moving frame of reference is a constant c.   

At about 40 degree north, the speed of earth’s rotation is about 750 MPH.  At the equator, the speed of rotation is
about 1,000 MPH.  

Relative to the center of the earth, the speed of light at 40 degree north going EAST is 250 MPH slower than the
speed of light at the equator.  

Relative to the center of the earth, WEST bound light at the equator is going 2,000 slower than EAST bound light.
That is: WEST light speed  = c-1000 MPH, while EAST light speed = c+1000 MPH.

Relative to the sun, the relative speed of light on earth is 67,000 MPH faster than the relative speed of light on the
sun.  That is because the earth is going around the sun at a speed of about 67,000 MPH. That gives us: the relative
speed of light on earth of c + 67,000 MPH + or - 0 to 1,000 MPH depending on the location and orientation of the
test equipment relative to the earth’s rotation.

We see from these examples that the speed of light is relative to the frame of reference.  We also see that the
speed of light is additive to the frame of reference as shown in the theory of relativity with the formula w=c-v.  

We also see that the speed of the frame of reference does not change the relative speed of light in the frame.  As a
result, the speed of light will remain constant within the frame of reference even when the frame of reference is
moving at any speed including virtually unlimited speeds.  

If a box is moving at 186,300 mps, the speed of light inside the box will be 186,300 mps regardless of the
orientation of the test device.  If a box is accelerated to a speed of 500,000 mps, the speed of light inside the box
will be 186,000 mps regardless of the orientation of the measurement device.  The relative speed of light in a frame
moving 500,000 mps is 686,300 mps.  

As we all know, the relative speed of light in a vacuum in a moving frame of reference is a constant 186,300 MPS
regardless of the motion of the frame of reference. We also all know that the speed of light is relatively additive to
the frame of reference.  

- The fact that the earth spins while it moves around the sun does not alter the requirement for the laws of physics
to apply to an internal frame and all it’s contents whether moving or stationary.

- In addition to the changing relationship of a point on earth relative to the sun, our solar systems frame is moving in
space at a speed of about 450 thousand miles per hour in some direction. That means that you and your test
equipment are moving over 517,000 miles per hour.

- None of the above mentioned movement of any of the above mentioned objects changes the fact that the laws of
physics are the same in any inertial frame, and, in particular, any measurement of the speed of light in any inertial
frame will always give 186,300 miles per second.

That is just the way it is for the relatively additive speed of light and the requirement for the laws of physics to apply
to any and all objects within or external to any frame of reference.   



We all know speed of light is constant in every inertial frame. The issue is across frames. Even Albert specified in his
theory of relativity that the speed of light is additive across frames. He has a formula that specifies the cross frames
difference. Since it is additive, and he knew it, he had to eliminate the meaning of time. He gave his train thought
experiment as proof.

A person on a moving train doesn't know they are on a moving train. The person on the train moves past a
person on the ground just as lightning strikes two places an equal distance away. The person on the ground
observes the lightning strikes as simultaneous. That is because he or she is at the mid point between the light
flashes so they arrive at him at the same time. The person on the train moves away from the mid point. Hence
the person on the train is moving toward one lightning strike and away from the other. He is racing ahead of
one lightning strike so that lightning strikes arrives at him later than the lightning strike he is racing toward.
Therefore, the train observer doesn't observe the lightning strikes as simultaneous.

Now we all know that the person on the train has moved away from the mid point so they can't observe the
lightning strikes as simultaneous. Even Albert stated that he knew that fact. It doesn't matter if the train is
moving or stopped on the track. If the person on the train isn't an equal distance between the lightning strikes
when the light arrives, one light will have a shorter distance to travel then the other so the observer who isn't
at the mid point can’t observe them as simultaneous. Again,  even Albert acknowledged that fact.

However; Albert says the illusion represents fact.  Albert specifically states the obvious, that the lightning strikes
don't seem to be simultaneous in the train frame. He then concludes that simultaneous in one moving frame aren't
simultaneous in another moving frame because the person on the train doesn't observe them as simultaneous and
doesn't know he is on a moving train and doesn't know he has moved from the mid point.

We all know the person in the train is moving.  Albert knew he is moving.  If the train observer knew he is moving,
he could use Albert's cross frame speed of light formula in his theory. He could use his speed and distance traveled
to identify exactly how much of a difference will be observed between the different arrival time of the lightning
strikes. Then the simultaneous events across frames would remain constant and Albert wouldn't have resolved the
problem he knew of and specifically spelled out in detail.  The fact is, Albert didn't eliminate the meaning of time
because simultaneous events across moving frames of reference remain simultaneous.  

Everybody knows that the speed of light is constant in an inertial frame.

Everybody knows that light traveling two different distances will arrive at different times.

Therefore; everybody should agree with Albert when he wrote his formula that specifies the additive cross moving
frame speed of light. I agree with Albert on the cross moving frames additive speed of light. I disagree with Albert’s
conclusion that a false perception eliminates the meaning of time.

I read the theory of relativity. It is all we need to prove it is based on illusion. In the early part of it, Albert states
that the truth isn't the truth. It is very clear about the use of false perception to represent fact.

See how light changes speed as it moves from a train frame to the earth frame.  Light from a flashlight moved from a
train to a bicycle rider.      


Don Edward Sprague

Copyright 23 July, 2008 All rights reserved.

Stellar data analysis, Stellar clock/time

Constant time vs variable time data analysis.  

According to Einstein’s relativity, time varies based on the speed of the observer.  Time supposedly
slows for the faster moving person.  A second for the faster moving person is shorter than a second
for the slower moving person. When 2 or more people moving different speeds or velocities observe
the same distant events, the duration of those events are 2 fold.  First, the duration is the length of
time it takes for the event to happen where the event occurs.  Second, the duration of the event is
the time it takes as determined by the each observer.  A faster moving observer would record a
shorter event duration.  


According to any constant time progression and constant space theory, the duration of events is 1
fold.  The duration of events will be the same for all observers regardless of their location or
velocity.  

We have considerable data of stellar events.  An analysis of the data will prove which is accurate.  

There are certain givens:

- We have many observations points that have recorded stellar events over various times.  This
gives considerable data to analyze.  

- Every observation point is moving at different velocities throughout time.
– Every stationary observation point is only stationary relative to other common points,
– All observation point on earth are relatively fixed from all other observation points on earth.  
– Observation points in fixed orbit are relatively fixed distance from all ground points,
- Various observation locations are known distances from each other so their difference in Einstein
variable time can be determined as compared to each other. An observation point that is at a higher
altitude and closer to the equator has a higher velocity than lower altitude observation points that
are north or south of the equator.

- Since Einstein says the velocity of the observer changed the length of their seconds, and
- Since the speed of all observation points is different, and
- Since Einstein specifies variable time based on speed of the observer,
- Then the duration for stellar events to happen is 2 fold.  
– 1, It is the event duration of the event as it happens
– 2, It is the various event durations as observed at each observation point based on the different
rate of time progression as compared to the different observation point velocities.    

Thus, according to Einstein the duration of distant stellar events will vary based on the velocity of
the observer.  Event durations will also vary based on one observer location since the observer
location never has the same velocity over time.

According any theory with constant time progression in a constant space, the duration of events is
the same regardless of observer location or velocity.  


It simply takes several data from different or the same locations of observations.  

If Einstein is correct, the time duration of the stellar events is always variable based on the velocity
of the observer, the distant events will never have a predictable duration.  That is because the
observation point velocity is never the same so their seconds are never the same.  


Don Edward Sprague

Copyright 04 Oct, 2010 All rights reserved.

There is an old saying about not needing to state the obvious.  In this case, it seems that the
obvious for some is obscure for others.   

- An atomic clock moved inches higher than another showed a  measured difference in time reading.  

- A few years ago, the change in earth’s motion was calculated as the result of a of a large earth
quake.  

- The Mercury orbit difference is about 1 turn in 2 centuries.

Thus, we see that there is a valid concern about minute differences.   

The Earth Rotation is
19,700 inches per second

Earth around sun
1,180,000 inches per second

Sun around galaxy
9.840,000 inches per second

Galaxy in cluster
11,800,000 inches per second


On point on the equator has a different day/night velocity of 39,400 inches per second.  That is
because the night rotation goes with it’s movement around the sun.  The night rotation goes
against it’s movement around the sun.  

The same point on the equator has an annual difference of 2,399,400 inches per second.  That is
because the earth movement around the sun is with sun movement half the year and against the
sun movement half the year.  The day/night difference is also added in.  

Since a slight movement of an atomic clock of just a few inches gives a measured time difference,
the vast difference of the earth rotation and it's movement around the sun and the sun’s movement
has a huge Einstein variable time difference for any observation station over just one year.  The
difference is greater when considered for hundreds or thousands of years.  Then considering the
locations of different observatories makes the difference even larger.  


Don Edward Sprague

Copyright 13 Oct, 2010 All rights reserved.
Hubble Law is based on red shift but redshift does not support Hubbles Law.


[quote]
The galaxies we see in all directions are moving away from the Earth, as evidenced by their red shifts. Hubble's
law describes this expansion.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/astro/hubble.html
[/quote]

Hubble and others observed a correlation between dim stars and red shift.  Some redshift shows
motion from the observer.  So they say; red shift must be showing the expansion of the universe.
  

[quote]
Hubble's law is a statement of a direct correlation between the distance to a galaxy and its recessional velocity
as determined by the red shift.
[/quote]

There it is. It is worth repeating:  

Hubble's law is a statement of a direct correlation between the distance to a galaxy and its
recessional velocity as
determined by the red shift.


[quote]
The Hubble constant H is one of the most important numbers in cosmology because it may be used to estimate
the size and age of the Universe. It indicates the rate at which the universe is expanding. Although [B]the
Hubble "constant" is not really constant [/B]because it changes with time (and therefore should probably more
properly be called the "Hubble parameter").
http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr162/lect/cosmology/hubble_constant.html
[/quote]

The Hubble constant H is one of the most important numbers in cosmology:
- it is not constant because it changes with time
- it is properly be called the "Hubble parameter"

The most important CONSTANT numbers in cosmology:
- may be used to estimate the size and age of the Universe.
- indicates the rate at which the universe is expanding.
- is NOT CONSTANT

[quote]
In 1929, Edwin Hubble announced that almost all galaxies appeared to be moving away from us. This
phenomenon was observed as a redshift of a galaxy's spectrum. This redshift appeared to have a larger
displacement for faint, presumably further, galaxies. Hence, the farther a galaxy, the faster it is receding from
Earth.
[/quote]


Redshift appeared to have a larger displacement for faint, presumably further, galaxies. Hence, the
farther a galaxy, the faster it is
(SUPPOSEDLY) receding from Earth. The greater the distance light
travels through
empty space and is shifted, the greater is the shift.


[quote]
Vesto Slipher, an astronomer at the Lowell Observatory in Flagstaff, Arizona, was finishing a detailed study of
the night sky. He examined several of the faint, fuzzy "nebulae" that he saw in his telescope. He carefully
measured the nebulae's spectra - the amount of light they emitted at different wavelengths. He found that the
spectra of nearly all of them were "redshifted" - their light was redder than it should have been. Slipher knew
that when an object's light was redshifted, it was moving away from Earth, and that the object's speed was
proportional to the redshift. He calculated the nebulae's speeds, and found they were all moving away from us
incredibly quickly:
http://cas.sdss.org/dr5/en/proj/advanced/hubble/
[/quote]


It wasn’t really Hubble who came up with the idea.  He simply took or was given credit for Slipher’s
work.   

Einstein called it his biggest blunder for not recognizing it.



Two main question emerge.
- Is there other proof of expanding universe other than Redshift?  - NO
- Could the redshift be from something other the object moving away? - YES

First, is there other proof of the expanding universe.  It seem that there is not.  In fact, It seems
that even the use of Hubble constant is not constant and the redshift is not consistent.   

The analogy of a balloon with dots does not support Expanding universe.  It only supports changing
universe.

A balloon with dots is used as an example of the expanding universe. However; it is not a good
analogy.  The painted dots get further apart when the balloon is expanded.  A balloon has a place
where air is added.  That gives a reference point for all observers riding on the balloon.  Also, an
observer in the middle of the balloon is not actually in the middle and there would need to be a
layer of balloons with dots painted on to simulate the universe.  

Aside from the poor analogy, using the dots on a balloon concept in distant study, it seems that the
distances between stellar bodies is not increasing proportional to the redshift.  Thus, the balloon
example does provide a method of showing that Hubble is incorrect.



Could the redshift be from something other the object moving away.

Since empty space is not empty, there is a lot of stuff for light to go through and be shifted.  Simply
put, there is interactions and phenomena in the subjects of radiative transfer and physical optics
which
- CAN result in shifts in the wavelength and frequency of electromagnetic radiation.

The greater the distance light travels through stuff in space and is shifted, the
greater is the shift... DUH.

The shifts can be due to things such as:
- coherence effects
- scattering of electromagnetic radiation
– from charged elementary particles,
– from particulates,
– from fluctuations of index of refraction
- entropy
- Wolf effect
- Brillouin scattering
- and other things in empty space that is not empty.

Thus, we see that Hubble variable constant expansion is not supported by redshift or any other
supporting observations.  

Stuff in space moves like in musical chairs without removing a chair.  There are places and stuff
moved from place to place.  Space is constant.  Time progresses or builds on it's self at a constant
rate.

Copyright Don E. Sprague 2007 updated 11 oct 2011
At any instant, any observer in any location is an equally valid observer and the conditions are
without information has the potential of being an equally valid observer when they collect and use
all information that all other observers have.  
When time is frozen,  all things are absolutely frozen in space.  Any imaginary people can wander
around and measure all things. Things do NOT change shape based on direction of travel.


In the Lotentz contraction contradiction:   
- The ladder supposedly shrinks to the garage observer
- The garage supposedly shrinks to the ladder observer.

In reality neither shrinks.  Using thought cameras on both the garage and the ladder, we see that
the ladder and the garage do not simultaneously shrink based on motion of direction of travel of the
observer or the observed.


With the ability to freeze time in thought experiment, we are able to examine conditions of all things
at an instant in time.

Consider a person on a train going 65 mph.   

Consider two strobe 2 miles away from the person in the train.  Both lights flash.

We froze time exactly when the light flashed.

While time is frozen, the person gets off the train and walks around.  He or she finds that there are
a few hundred other people walking around examining things.  They all find that the lights flashed
simultaneously regardless of where the observers were when time was frozen.

This thought experiment to freeze things shows that conditions are absolute at an instant
regardless of the position of the observer.  This goes to the heart of Einstein’s known fundamental
singularity flaw. His theory leads to time ending and gravity going to infinity.

Time only varies to end as a result Einstein variable time as established in section 9 of his paper
where he claims a person can NOT know they are on a moving train.  

Even a child can know they are on a moving train.  

It is obvious that the simultaneous lights did occur simultaneously.  The event conditions are
absolute for all observers in all frame.  An observer’s lack of information or skill doesn’t alter reality.  

Section 20 of Einstein’s paper is another illusion that supposedly makes acceleration the same as
gravity.  That uninformed observer’s mistake does not translate to fact.  

Einstein section 9 and 20 are wrong.   Time progresses at a constant rate in all places.  Space is
constant.  It is just a bunch of places for stuff that moves or plays musical chairs.  

Classical mechanics is accurate but needed additions.  I provide that in ChR.

Copyright