Gravity Probe B

Gravity Probe B
www.rgrace.org/126/145gravframe.html

The reality of space, mass and falling elevators is that frame dragging and geodetic precession is caused by the intrinsic spiraling of space itself first, not matter. The reality of space, mass and falling elevators is that spiraling space causes the earth and all other planets and moons to spin and precess within the even larger spiraling field of the sun. The reality of space, mass and falling elevators is that Einstein is precise and has his relativity precisely backwards or his followers do, yet, Gravity Probe B will confirm that the perfectly backward, earth-referenced results are in perfect accord with the perfectly backward, earth-referenced Relativity.

But none of Relativity's earth-referenced spin and twist or Gravity Probe B's results are reality. It is space that is the source of first spin and IS both "charge" and "gravity".

Meta
rgrace@rgrace.org
Impossible Correspondence
www.rgrace.org/index.html

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by tvanflandern</i>
<br /><blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by KoenigMKII</i>
<br />won't GP-B detect the instantaneous position of Sun, Moon, Jupiter, Saturn, Venus, Mars etc, rather than the light-time delayed ones, if MM is correct?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">No. The full tugs of the planets are already almost negligible except over long time periods, so the tiny differences between instantaneous and delayed tugs would be even more negligible. And that is standard dynamics, having nothing to do with MM. Although "geometric" GR does not interpret instantaneous gravity as a propagation faster than light, it does recognize that gravitational force cannot be modeled with a light-speed delay and still get valid orbits. -|Tom|-
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I don't quite understand. If the Satellite is changing its position wrt Moon, the Satellite would be seeing over 1 Second in light time delay for a gravity signal (if no information can travel faster than light). In 1 second a 400 mile polar orbit satellite can travel a good distance. How can that difference be negligible for a satellite that is sensitive enough to detect "frame dragging"?

OK I can agree that the NASA team will use Einstein's equations that have infinite speed gravity plugged into them, so the instruments will not be set up to show the difference.

But the satellite does get FTL information (Moons postion) and if it were calibrated with light time delayed gravity, it would show a FTL gravity signal... ??

Sorry if I am making a total fool of myself.. but something is bothering me about this.

KoenigMKII

in my view they won't detect the instaneous position of the Sun or other planets.

why? because they measuring the SPIN of astronomical bodies and seeing it's effects.notice that in jets coming from some galaxies,these jets are at the poles,now since every mass spins and that the spin for each mass varies the ability to produce visable jets also varies.(it is also dependent on the acceleration and volume)so that actually each spining mass has this same action,yet is unseen.

following this,which by the way is a hydrdynamic point of view,this means that at the Earths poles there is a slight jet action which may block any influence the Sun or planets may have.since also they have jet action but not in the direction of the earths poles.

more latter!!

any comments people!!?

further,also there is the influence of the position at the equatorial of all Suns,planets etc. which reach out into the surrounding space.this influence(an example of which for instance that can be seen,rings around Neptune,Uranus etc.)if we start from the equatorial of the Sun moving then out,this influence then starts an interference pattern(a little like ripples in a large pond but with the ripples all differing in size,depth and reach of influence but together has become a steady overall pattern) with Mercury,Venus then Earth,Mars and so on.now these might cause, because of the complex patterns that evolve along with the vertical depth of the patterns might,possible, over come the effects of,what i think is only a slight jet action at the poles of the Earth.also you have the equatorial patterns that are coming in from Pluto,Uranus(interesting twist here!!) Neptune etc.

it will be curious to see what they find happens!!

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by KoenigMKII</i>
<br />If the Satellite is changing its position wrt Moon, the Satellite would be seeing over 1 Second in light time delay for a gravity signal (if no information can travel faster than light).<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Gravitational force always acts so nearly instantaneously that no delay has ever been detected. Light-speed delays would be easy to detect.

Now that SR is falsified in favor of LR by the FTL propagation speed of gravitational force, the old idea that information cannot travel FTL is gone.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">In 1 second a 400 mile polar orbit satellite can travel a good distance. How can that difference be negligible for a satellite that is sensitive enough to detect "frame dragging"?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">That difference is not negligible. But both GR and MM treat gravity as acting nearly instantaneously, which gives the correct orbits. Light-speed delay gives the wrong orbits.

GR always knew this was the case. But the rationalization was the now-discredited "geometric" interpretation, in which gravity is not a force that propagates, but simply a curvature of spacetime, thereby not violating SR's prohibition against FTL propagation. The problems with that viewpoint are many:
* It is an effect without a cause. (Curvature alone cannot initiate motion.)
* It requires the creation of new momentum <i>ex nihilo</i>.
* Gravity is a force in 3-space by definition: the time rate of change of 3-space momentum. It must propagate to connect its cause (source mass) to its effect (target body).
* Spacetime has no spatial component.
* Etc. as in our 2002 paper in Foundations of Physics.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">But the satellite does get FTL information (Moons postion) and if it were calibrated with light time delayed gravity, it would show a FTL gravity signal... ??<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">"Light-time-delayed gravity" (whatever that is) can't be made to work in even the most rudimentary applications to orbits, as even simple computer experiments show.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Sorry if I am making a total fool of myself.. but something is bothering me about this.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">The fault for this confusion is not yours. A lot of physicists have been sweeping this sleeping dragon under the rug for the past century. The dragon has now awakened, and is angry. -|Tom|-

I'm confused again-I thought the speed of gravity in SR&LR was the same as the speed of light and in MM was FTL. Now you say all these models have gravity at FLT or am I missing something else too?