On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 7:02:19 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> On 9/15/2021 8:36 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 2:40:05 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 1:31:48 PM UTC-7, Hardy Kuhn wrote:
> >>> mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 8:08:55 AM UTC-7, Gale Binz wrote:
> >>>>> mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> If length contraction is real it would have a consequence on
> >>>>>>>>>> chemistry.
> >>>>>>>>> it's about the observations, not changes in chemical reactions or
> >>>>>>>>> consistence just by observing it. Think.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> If you observe it it would have an affect on chemistry...
> >>>>>>>> It is not real...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> How have you measured length contraction?
> >>>>> as usual, with my meterstick in which I trust.
> >>>>
> >>>> Its never been measured. How are you going to do it you? Why would you
> >>>> be the exception?
> >>> it's been.
> >> No it hasn't. That is you pretending it has instead...
> >> What about a space ship?
> >>
> >> Mitchell Raemsch
> >
> > Either length contraction is real or it is not.
> > And it is not... universal distance cannot go away...
> > it does expand instead... and that is measured
> > to be accelerating.
> >
> Mitch, you Roy Masters, in the frame of the spaceship, the spaceship is
> stationary

No it isn't. It knows it has accelerated...
Begin to move and you like a spaceship know you are moving.
The space ship beginning to move will feel weight...
that is the difference.

Mitchell Raemsch

On Thursday, 16 September 2021 at 04:02:19 UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote:

> Mitch, you Roy Masters, in the frame of the spaceship, the spaceship is
> stationary and the astronaut and atoms are not squished. However the
> astronaut will observe the rest of the universe as being squished!

Gedanken astronaut will observe gedanken wonders, no surprise.
In the meantime in the real world, however, the clocks of GPS keep
indicating t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did.

On 9/15/2021 10:52 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 7:02:19 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> On 9/15/2021 8:36 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 2:40:05 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 1:31:48 PM UTC-7, Hardy Kuhn wrote:
>>>>> mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:

>>> Either length contraction is real or it is not.
>>> And it is not... universal distance cannot go away...
>>> it does expand instead... and that is measured
>>> to be accelerating.
>>>
>> Mitch, you Roy Masters, in the frame of the spaceship, the spaceship is
>> stationary
>
> No it isn't. It knows it has accelerated...
> Begin to move and you like a spaceship know you are moving.

Roy Masters, I'm talking about the ship cruising along, not
accelerating. After any acceleration has been done.

> The space ship beginning to move will feel weight...

You mean force. Again that involves acceleration.

> that is the difference.

Once the ship reaches a cruising speed and no longer accelerates, it is
inertial and the astronaut in the ship can consider himself stationary
and marvel at the length contracted universe whiz by out the window.

On Thursday, 16 September 2021 at 08:49:19 UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote:

> Once the ship reaches a cruising speed and no longer accelerates, it is
> inertial and the astronaut in the ship can consider himself stationary
> and marvel at the length contracted universe whiz by out the window.

A gedanken astronaut in a gedanken ship of gedanken
scenarios may observe gedanken wonders of Giant
Guru, but in the meantime in the real world the real clocks
of the real GPS keep indicating t'=t, just like all serious
clocks always did.

On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 11:49:19 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> On 9/15/2021 10:52 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 7:02:19 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >> On 9/15/2021 8:36 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 2:40:05 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 1:31:48 PM UTC-7, Hardy Kuhn wrote:
> >>>>> mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >>> Either length contraction is real or it is not.
> >>> And it is not... universal distance cannot go away...
> >>> it does expand instead... and that is measured
> >>> to be accelerating.
> >>>
> >> Mitch, you Roy Masters, in the frame of the spaceship, the spaceship is
> >> stationary
> >
> > No it isn't. It knows it has accelerated...
> > Begin to move and you like a spaceship know you are moving.
> Roy Masters, I'm talking about the ship cruising along, not
> accelerating. After any acceleration has been done.
> > The space ship beginning to move will feel weight...
> You mean force. Again that involves acceleration.

No. Feeling weight in that case is not from gravity or force.
It is from the ships propulsion instead.

> > that is the difference.
>
> Once the ship reaches a cruising speed and no longer accelerates, it is
> inertial and the astronaut in the ship can consider himself stationary
> and marvel at the length contracted universe whiz by out the window.

Nothing can be considered stationary as there is no absolute rest.
Voyager are slowing down subject to gravity leaving the Solar system.
If gravity is everywhere affecting motion there are no inertial frames.
Einstein got inertial frames wrong because motion's in general are not
steady. As a rule speed is always subject to change instead.
Show what speeds are steady if you can...

Mitchell Raemsch

On 9/16/2021 12:58 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 11:49:19 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> On 9/15/2021 10:52 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 7:02:19 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>> On 9/15/2021 8:36 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 2:40:05 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 1:31:48 PM UTC-7, Hardy Kuhn wrote:
>>>>>>> mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>>> Either length contraction is real or it is not.
>>>>> And it is not... universal distance cannot go away...
>>>>> it does expand instead... and that is measured
>>>>> to be accelerating.
>>>>>
>>>> Mitch, you Roy Masters, in the frame of the spaceship, the spaceship is
>>>> stationary
>>>
>>> No it isn't. It knows it has accelerated...
>>> Begin to move and you like a spaceship know you are moving.

>> Roy Masters, I'm talking about the ship cruising along, not
>> accelerating. After any acceleration has been done.

>>> The space ship beginning to move will feel weight...
>> You mean force. Again that involves acceleration.
>
> No. Feeling weight in that case is not from gravity or force.
> It is from the ships propulsion instead.

Weight is the force from gravity. You said correctly it's from the
acceleration, so the force is not from gravity, so it's not weight.
This is a mistake you always make, is English not your first language?

Anyway, the ship is cruising at constant speed so not accelerating at
all so there is no force in the situation I'm discussing.
>
>>> that is the difference.
>>
>> Once the ship reaches a cruising speed and no longer accelerates, it is
>> inertial and the astronaut in the ship can consider himself stationary
>> and marvel at the length contracted universe whiz by out the window.
>
> Nothing can be considered stationary as there is no absolute rest.

Nothing is absolutely stationary, correct. But anything (inertial) can
be considered stationary relative to itself, so anything inertial can be
used as a reference for stationary. So it's valid for my
(non-accelerating) spacecraft to consider itself stationary.

> Voyager are slowing down subject to gravity leaving the Solar system.

Yes, and...? Since there are no other forces on the Voyagers, they are
in "free fall" relative to the sun* so they are locally inertial.

> If gravity is everywhere affecting motion there are no inertial frames.

There are always inertial frames. Trying to make an object stationary
(inertial) in one may or may not be easy. If there are no other forces
on the object and the graviting masses are so distant there is no
gradient then they are in free fall and locally inertial.

> Einstein got inertial frames wrong because motion's in general are not
> steady. As a rule speed is always subject to change instead.

Changing speeds requires an external force.
> Show what speeds are steady if you can...
>
Any time there is zero force. See Newton, Roy.
(*) The Voyagers are moving away from the sun and exceed escape velocity
so yes, they'll never fall toward the sun but free fall is the correct term.

On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 2:28:43 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> On 9/16/2021 12:58 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 11:49:19 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >> On 9/15/2021 10:52 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 7:02:19 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >>>> On 9/15/2021 8:36 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 2:40:05 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 1:31:48 PM UTC-7, Hardy Kuhn wrote:
> >>>>>>> mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>
> >>>>> Either length contraction is real or it is not.
> >>>>> And it is not... universal distance cannot go away...
> >>>>> it does expand instead... and that is measured
> >>>>> to be accelerating.
> >>>>>
> >>>> Mitch, you Roy Masters, in the frame of the spaceship, the spaceship is
> >>>> stationary
> >>>
> >>> No it isn't. It knows it has accelerated...
> >>> Begin to move and you like a spaceship know you are moving.
>
> >> Roy Masters, I'm talking about the ship cruising along, not
> >> accelerating. After any acceleration has been done.
>
> >>> The space ship beginning to move will feel weight...
> >> You mean force. Again that involves acceleration.
> >
> > No. Feeling weight in that case is not from gravity or force.
> > It is from the ships propulsion instead.
> Weight is the force from gravity.

Gravity is geometry where weightless can be.
The weight side is not always with the real force.

>
> Anyway, the ship is cruising at constant speed so not accelerating at
> all so there is no force in the situation I'm discussing.
> >
> >>> that is the difference.
> >>
> >> Once the ship reaches a cruising speed and no longer accelerates, it is
> >> inertial and the astronaut in the ship can consider himself stationary

No. There can be inner movements of the space ship to itself.
That self stillness never applies always...

> > Nothing can be considered stationary as there is no absolute rest.
> Nothing is absolutely stationary, correct. But anything (inertial) can
> be considered stationary relative to itself, so anything inertial can be
> used as a reference for stationary. So it's valid for my
> (non-accelerating) spacecraft to consider itself stationary.
> > Voyager are slowing down subject to gravity leaving the Solar system.
> Yes, and...? Since there are no other forces on the Voyagers, they are
> in "free fall" relative to the sun* so they are locally inertial.

Gravity will always count...

> > If gravity is everywhere affecting motion there are no inertial frames.
> There are always inertial frames. Trying to make an object stationary
> (inertial) in one may or may not be easy. If there are no other forces
> on the object and the graviting masses are so distant there is no
> gradient then they are in free fall and locally inertial.
> > Einstein got inertial frames wrong because motion's in general are not
> > steady. As a rule speed is always subject to change instead.
> Changing speeds requires an external force.
> > Show what speeds are steady if you can...
> >
> Any time there is zero force. See Newton, Roy.

Isn't gravity supposed to be everywhere you moron?
What about the space station's zero gravity?
It still has a gravity field. It is not zero gravity it
is weightlessness instead...

> (*) The Voyagers are moving away from the sun and exceed escape velocity

Can you prove that?

> so yes, they'll never fall toward the sun but free fall is the correct term.

They will be slowing down...

Mitchell Raemsch

On 9/17/2021 8:42 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 2:28:43 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> On 9/16/2021 12:58 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 11:49:19 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>> On 9/15/2021 10:52 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 7:02:19 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:

>>>>>> Mitch, you Roy Masters, in the frame of the spaceship, the spaceship is
>>>>>> stationary
>>>>>
>>>>> No it isn't. It knows it has accelerated...
>>>>> Begin to move and you like a spaceship know you are moving.
>>
>>>> Roy Masters, I'm talking about the ship cruising along, not
>>>> accelerating. After any acceleration has been done.
>>
>>>>> The space ship beginning to move will feel weight...
>>>> You mean force. Again that involves acceleration.
>>>
>>> No. Feeling weight in that case is not from gravity or force.
>>> It is from the ships propulsion instead.

>> Weight is the force from gravity.
>
> Gravity is geometry where weightless can be.
> The weight side is not always with the real force.

English, please. I don't understand babble.

>>>> Once the ship reaches a cruising speed and no longer accelerates, it is
>>>> inertial and the astronaut in the ship can consider himself stationary
>
> No. There can be inner movements of the space ship to itself.

Are you saying that if the astronaut is walking from the back to the
front of the spaceship he's not stationary relative to it? Good grief.

> That self stillness never applies always...

Again, English, please.
>
>>> Voyager are slowing down subject to gravity leaving the Solar system.
>> Yes, and...? Since there are no other forces on the Voyagers, they are
>> in "free fall" relative to the sun* so they are locally inertial.
>
> Gravity will always count...

And...? The Voyager is in free fall. One of the points in engineering
and science is to look at possible sources of error and in a thought
experiment you can consider them zero. So a spaceship considering itself
stationary in a thought experiment can ignore gravity, just assume it's
far enough away that it can be ignored.
>
>>> Show what speeds are steady if you can...
>>>
>> Any time there is zero force. See Newton, Roy.
>
> Isn't gravity supposed to be everywhere you moron?

See above. Plus everything is in freefall relative to the ignorable
amount of gravity.

> What about the space station's zero gravity?

What about it? It's because of freefall.

> It still has a gravity field. It is not zero gravity it
> is weightlessness instead...

It's also orbiting a planet, so gravity cannot be ignored. I'm talking
about an inertial spaceship, far enough from any gravity source its
effect is trivial.
>
>> (*) The Voyagers are moving away from the sun and exceed escape velocity
>
> Can you prove that?

Yes. Google their current distances, their velocities at that distance,
then calculate the sun's escape velocity at that distance. You can do
the math yourself.

On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 7:23:16 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> On 9/17/2021 8:42 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 2:28:43 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >> On 9/16/2021 12:58 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 11:49:19 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >>>> On 9/15/2021 10:52 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 7:02:19 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
>
> >>>>>> Mitch, you Roy Masters, in the frame of the spaceship, the spaceship is
> >>>>>> stationary
> >>>>>
> >>>>> No it isn't. It knows it has accelerated...
> >>>>> Begin to move and you like a spaceship know you are moving.
> >>
> >>>> Roy Masters, I'm talking about the ship cruising along, not
> >>>> accelerating. After any acceleration has been done.
> >>
> >>>>> The space ship beginning to move will feel weight...
> >>>> You mean force. Again that involves acceleration.
> >>>
> >>> No. Feeling weight in that case is not from gravity or force.
> >>> It is from the ships propulsion instead.
>
> >> Weight is the force from gravity.
> >
> > Gravity is geometry where weightless can be.
> > The weight side is not always with the real force.
> English, please. I don't understand babble.
> >>>> Once the ship reaches a cruising speed and no longer accelerates, it is
> >>>> inertial and the astronaut in the ship can consider himself stationary
> >
> > No. There can be inner movements of the space ship to itself.
> Are you saying that if the astronaut is walking from the back to the
> front of the spaceship he's not stationary relative to it? Good grief.
> > That self stillness never applies always...
> Again, English, please.
> >
> >>> Voyager are slowing down subject to gravity leaving the Solar system.
> >> Yes, and...? Since there are no other forces on the Voyagers, they are
> >> in "free fall" relative to the sun* so they are locally inertial.
> >
> > Gravity will always count...
> And...? The Voyager is in free fall. One of the points in engineering
> and science is to look at possible sources of error and in a thought
> experiment you can consider them zero. So a spaceship considering itself
> stationary in a thought experiment can ignore gravity, just assume it's
> far enough away that it can be ignored.
> >
> >>> Show what speeds are steady if you can...
> >>>
> >> Any time there is zero force. See Newton, Roy.
> >
> > Isn't gravity supposed to be everywhere you moron?
> See above. Plus everything is in freefall relative to the ignorable
> amount of gravity.
> > What about the space station's zero gravity?
> What about it? It's because of freefall.
> > It still has a gravity field. It is not zero gravity it
> > is weightlessness instead...
> It's also orbiting a planet, so gravity cannot be ignored. I'm talking
> about an inertial spaceship, far enough from any gravity source its
> effect is trivial.
> >
> >> (*) The Voyagers are moving away from the sun and exceed escape velocity
> >
> > Can you prove that?
> Yes. Google their current distances, their velocities at that distance,
> then calculate the sun's escape velocity at that distance. You can do
> the math yourself.

How did you calculate the Sun's escape velocity?
If you haven't measured it you cannot use it...

Mitchell Raemsch

On 9/18/2021 1:05 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 7:23:16 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> On 9/17/2021 8:42 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 2:28:43 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>> On 9/16/2021 12:58 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 11:49:19 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>>>> On 9/15/2021 10:52 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 7:02:19 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>> Mitch, you Roy Masters, in the frame of the spaceship, the spaceship is
>>>>>>>> stationary
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No it isn't. It knows it has accelerated...
>>>>>>> Begin to move and you like a spaceship know you are moving.
>>>>
>>>>>> Roy Masters, I'm talking about the ship cruising along, not
>>>>>> accelerating. After any acceleration has been done.
>>>>
>>>>>>> The space ship beginning to move will feel weight...
>>>>>> You mean force. Again that involves acceleration.
>>>>>
>>>>> No. Feeling weight in that case is not from gravity or force.
>>>>> It is from the ships propulsion instead.
>>
>>>> Weight is the force from gravity.
>>>
>>> Gravity is geometry where weightless can be.
>>> The weight side is not always with the real force.
>> English, please. I don't understand babble.
>>>>>> Once the ship reaches a cruising speed and no longer accelerates, it is
>>>>>> inertial and the astronaut in the ship can consider himself stationary
>>>
>>> No. There can be inner movements of the space ship to itself.
>> Are you saying that if the astronaut is walking from the back to the
>> front of the spaceship he's not stationary relative to it? Good grief.
>>> That self stillness never applies always...
>> Again, English, please.
>>>
>>>>> Voyager are slowing down subject to gravity leaving the Solar system.
>>>> Yes, and...? Since there are no other forces on the Voyagers, they are
>>>> in "free fall" relative to the sun* so they are locally inertial.
>>>
>>> Gravity will always count...
>> And...? The Voyager is in free fall. One of the points in engineering
>> and science is to look at possible sources of error and in a thought
>> experiment you can consider them zero. So a spaceship considering itself
>> stationary in a thought experiment can ignore gravity, just assume it's
>> far enough away that it can be ignored.
>>>
>>>>> Show what speeds are steady if you can...
>>>>>
>>>> Any time there is zero force. See Newton, Roy.
>>>
>>> Isn't gravity supposed to be everywhere you moron?
>> See above. Plus everything is in freefall relative to the ignorable
>> amount of gravity.
>>> What about the space station's zero gravity?
>> What about it? It's because of freefall.
>>> It still has a gravity field. It is not zero gravity it
>>> is weightlessness instead...
>> It's also orbiting a planet, so gravity cannot be ignored. I'm talking
>> about an inertial spaceship, far enough from any gravity source its
>> effect is trivial.
>>>
>>>> (*) The Voyagers are moving away from the sun and exceed escape velocity
>>>
>>> Can you prove that?
>> Yes. Google their current distances, their velocities at that distance,
>> then calculate the sun's escape velocity at that distance. You can do
>> the math yourself.
>
> How did you calculate the Sun's escape velocity?

Ask this guy named Newton.

> If you haven't measured it you cannot use it...

I can always use the numbers measured or calculated by someone else, Roy.

Hey Roy, shouldn't you be worried that your God will stop creating
gravity just long enough to toss you into hell because of all of your
lies? There you can join your buddy, Roy Masters. Unless you really are
Roy Masters. Who else can lie as much as you do?

On Saturday, September 18, 2021 at 7:52:59 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> On 9/18/2021 1:05 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 7:23:16 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >> On 9/17/2021 8:42 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 2:28:43 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >>>> On 9/16/2021 12:58 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 11:49:19 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >>>>>> On 9/15/2021 10:52 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 7:02:19 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >>
> >>>>>>>> Mitch, you Roy Masters, in the frame of the spaceship, the spaceship is
> >>>>>>>> stationary
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> No it isn't. It knows it has accelerated...
> >>>>>>> Begin to move and you like a spaceship know you are moving.
> >>>>
> >>>>>> Roy Masters, I'm talking about the ship cruising along, not
> >>>>>> accelerating. After any acceleration has been done.
> >>>>
> >>>>>>> The space ship beginning to move will feel weight...
> >>>>>> You mean force. Again that involves acceleration.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> No. Feeling weight in that case is not from gravity or force.
> >>>>> It is from the ships propulsion instead.
> >>
> >>>> Weight is the force from gravity.
> >>>
> >>> Gravity is geometry where weightless can be.
> >>> The weight side is not always with the real force.
> >> English, please. I don't understand babble.
> >>>>>> Once the ship reaches a cruising speed and no longer accelerates, it is
> >>>>>> inertial and the astronaut in the ship can consider himself stationary
> >>>
> >>> No. There can be inner movements of the space ship to itself.
> >> Are you saying that if the astronaut is walking from the back to the
> >> front of the spaceship he's not stationary relative to it? Good grief.
> >>> That self stillness never applies always...
> >> Again, English, please.
> >>>
> >>>>> Voyager are slowing down subject to gravity leaving the Solar system.
> >>>> Yes, and...? Since there are no other forces on the Voyagers, they are
> >>>> in "free fall" relative to the sun* so they are locally inertial.
> >>>
> >>> Gravity will always count...
> >> And...? The Voyager is in free fall. One of the points in engineering
> >> and science is to look at possible sources of error and in a thought
> >> experiment you can consider them zero. So a spaceship considering itself
> >> stationary in a thought experiment can ignore gravity, just assume it's
> >> far enough away that it can be ignored.
> >>>
> >>>>> Show what speeds are steady if you can...
> >>>>>
> >>>> Any time there is zero force. See Newton, Roy.
> >>>
> >>> Isn't gravity supposed to be everywhere you moron?
> >> See above. Plus everything is in freefall relative to the ignorable
> >> amount of gravity.
> >>> What about the space station's zero gravity?
> >> What about it? It's because of freefall.
> >>> It still has a gravity field. It is not zero gravity it
> >>> is weightlessness instead...
> >> It's also orbiting a planet, so gravity cannot be ignored. I'm talking
> >> about an inertial spaceship, far enough from any gravity source its
> >> effect is trivial.
> >>>
> >>>> (*) The Voyagers are moving away from the sun and exceed escape velocity
> >>>
> >>> Can you prove that?
> >> Yes. Google their current distances, their velocities at that distance,
> >> then calculate the sun's escape velocity at that distance. You can do
> >> the math yourself.
> >
> > How did you calculate the Sun's escape velocity?
> Ask this guy named Newton.
> > If you haven't measured it you cannot use it...
> I can always use the numbers measured or calculated by someone else, Roy.
>

Why would they be any better off in their data?
How do you know their data is accurate?
How do you know any drop off gravity in that way?

Mitchell Raemsch

On 9/20/2021 2:04 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, September 18, 2021 at 7:52:59 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> On 9/18/2021 1:05 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 7:23:16 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>> On 9/17/2021 8:42 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 2:28:43 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>>>> On 9/16/2021 12:58 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 11:49:19 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 9/15/2021 10:52 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 7:02:19 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Mitch, you Roy Masters, in the frame of the spaceship, the spaceship is
>>>>>>>>>> stationary
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No it isn't. It knows it has accelerated...
>>>>>>>>> Begin to move and you like a spaceship know you are moving.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Roy Masters, I'm talking about the ship cruising along, not
>>>>>>>> accelerating. After any acceleration has been done.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The space ship beginning to move will feel weight...
>>>>>>>> You mean force. Again that involves acceleration.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No. Feeling weight in that case is not from gravity or force.
>>>>>>> It is from the ships propulsion instead.
>>>>
>>>>>> Weight is the force from gravity.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gravity is geometry where weightless can be.
>>>>> The weight side is not always with the real force.
>>>> English, please. I don't understand babble.
>>>>>>>> Once the ship reaches a cruising speed and no longer accelerates, it is
>>>>>>>> inertial and the astronaut in the ship can consider himself stationary
>>>>>
>>>>> No. There can be inner movements of the space ship to itself.
>>>> Are you saying that if the astronaut is walking from the back to the
>>>> front of the spaceship he's not stationary relative to it? Good grief.
>>>>> That self stillness never applies always...
>>>> Again, English, please.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Voyager are slowing down subject to gravity leaving the Solar system.
>>>>>> Yes, and...? Since there are no other forces on the Voyagers, they are
>>>>>> in "free fall" relative to the sun* so they are locally inertial.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gravity will always count...
>>>> And...? The Voyager is in free fall. One of the points in engineering
>>>> and science is to look at possible sources of error and in a thought
>>>> experiment you can consider them zero. So a spaceship considering itself
>>>> stationary in a thought experiment can ignore gravity, just assume it's
>>>> far enough away that it can be ignored.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Show what speeds are steady if you can...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any time there is zero force. See Newton, Roy.
>>>>>
>>>>> Isn't gravity supposed to be everywhere you moron?
>>>> See above. Plus everything is in freefall relative to the ignorable
>>>> amount of gravity.
>>>>> What about the space station's zero gravity?
>>>> What about it? It's because of freefall.
>>>>> It still has a gravity field. It is not zero gravity it
>>>>> is weightlessness instead...
>>>> It's also orbiting a planet, so gravity cannot be ignored. I'm talking
>>>> about an inertial spaceship, far enough from any gravity source its
>>>> effect is trivial.
>>>>>
>>>>>> (*) The Voyagers are moving away from the sun and exceed escape velocity
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you prove that?
>>>> Yes. Google their current distances, their velocities at that distance,
>>>> then calculate the sun's escape velocity at that distance. You can do
>>>> the math yourself.
>>>
>>> How did you calculate the Sun's escape velocity?
>> Ask this guy named Newton.
>>> If you haven't measured it you cannot use it...
>> I can always use the numbers measured or calculated by someone else, Roy.
>>
>
> Why would they be any better off in their data?

Because they have the accurate scientific instruments which I don't, Smitch.

> How do you know their data is accurate?

Because the grand tour paths of the Voyagers actually worked for one,
Smitch. If the data were inaccurate it wouldn't work, Smitch.

> How do you know any drop off gravity in that way?
>
Please translate that last one into English.

On Monday, September 20, 2021 at 11:30:50 AM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> On 9/20/2021 2:04 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Saturday, September 18, 2021 at 7:52:59 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >> On 9/18/2021 1:05 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 7:23:16 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >>>> On 9/17/2021 8:42 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> On Friday, September 17, 2021 at 2:28:43 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >>>>>> On 9/16/2021 12:58 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 11:49:19 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 9/15/2021 10:52 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 15, 2021 at 7:02:19 PM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Mitch, you Roy Masters, in the frame of the spaceship, the spaceship is
> >>>>>>>>>> stationary
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> No it isn't. It knows it has accelerated...
> >>>>>>>>> Begin to move and you like a spaceship know you are moving.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Roy Masters, I'm talking about the ship cruising along, not
> >>>>>>>> accelerating. After any acceleration has been done.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The space ship beginning to move will feel weight...
> >>>>>>>> You mean force. Again that involves acceleration.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> No. Feeling weight in that case is not from gravity or force.
> >>>>>>> It is from the ships propulsion instead.
> >>>>
> >>>>>> Weight is the force from gravity.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Gravity is geometry where weightless can be.
> >>>>> The weight side is not always with the real force.
> >>>> English, please. I don't understand babble.
> >>>>>>>> Once the ship reaches a cruising speed and no longer accelerates, it is
> >>>>>>>> inertial and the astronaut in the ship can consider himself stationary
> >>>>>
> >>>>> No. There can be inner movements of the space ship to itself.
> >>>> Are you saying that if the astronaut is walking from the back to the
> >>>> front of the spaceship he's not stationary relative to it? Good grief.
> >>>>> That self stillness never applies always...
> >>>> Again, English, please.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> Voyager are slowing down subject to gravity leaving the Solar system.
> >>>>>> Yes, and...? Since there are no other forces on the Voyagers, they are
> >>>>>> in "free fall" relative to the sun* so they are locally inertial.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Gravity will always count...
> >>>> And...? The Voyager is in free fall. One of the points in engineering
> >>>> and science is to look at possible sources of error and in a thought
> >>>> experiment you can consider them zero. So a spaceship considering itself
> >>>> stationary in a thought experiment can ignore gravity, just assume it's
> >>>> far enough away that it can be ignored.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> Show what speeds are steady if you can...
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> Any time there is zero force. See Newton, Roy.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Isn't gravity supposed to be everywhere you moron?
> >>>> See above. Plus everything is in freefall relative to the ignorable
> >>>> amount of gravity.
> >>>>> What about the space station's zero gravity?
> >>>> What about it? It's because of freefall.
> >>>>> It still has a gravity field. It is not zero gravity it
> >>>>> is weightlessness instead...
> >>>> It's also orbiting a planet, so gravity cannot be ignored. I'm talking
> >>>> about an inertial spaceship, far enough from any gravity source its
> >>>> effect is trivial.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> (*) The Voyagers are moving away from the sun and exceed escape velocity
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Can you prove that?
> >>>> Yes. Google their current distances, their velocities at that distance,
> >>>> then calculate the sun's escape velocity at that distance. You can do
> >>>> the math yourself.
> >>>
> >>> How did you calculate the Sun's escape velocity?
> >> Ask this guy named Newton.
> >>> If you haven't measured it you cannot use it...
> >> I can always use the numbers measured or calculated by someone else, Roy.
> >>
> >
> > Why would they be any better off in their data?
> Because they have the accurate scientific instruments which I don't, Smitch.
> > How do you know their data is accurate?
> Because the grand tour paths of the Voyagers actually worked for one,
> Smitch. If the data were inaccurate it wouldn't work, Smitch.
> > How do you know any drop off gravity in that way?
> >
> Please translate that last one into English.

Either length contracts or it does not.
And it does not...

Mitchell Raemsch

On Monday, 20 September 2021 at 20:30:50 UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote:

> Because they have the accurate scientific instruments which I don't, Smitch.

As anyone can check in GPS, however, these "accurate scientific
instruments" are pretty useless junk when it comes to serious
measurement.