Bodkin, my boy, according to GR there is a time dilation of 6 seconds per year at the surface of the sun. There must be some constant of nature that will betray these six seconds when observed from the earth. Perhaps the ratio of hydrogen to helium spectra or something. Run along now and bring us such data.

patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> wrote:
> Bodkin, my boy, according to GR there is a time dilation of 6 seconds per
> year at the surface of the sun. There must be some constant of nature
> that will betray these six seconds when observed from the earth. Perhaps
> the ratio of hydrogen to helium spectra or something. Run along now and
> bring us such data.
>

Absolutely. That time dilation produces a redshift in spectra from sources
at the surface of the sun, though you have to be careful what you mean by
“surface” since most photons are produced in the photosphere.

But in terms of changing anything about local physics processes, you’re out
of luck, for obvious reasons. (For the obvious reasons, consider the fact
that cesium atoms do not behave any differently at GPS altitudes.)

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 1:24:20 PM UTC-7, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> patdolan <patd...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > Bodkin, my boy, according to GR there is a time dilation of 6 seconds per
> > year at the surface of the sun. There must be some constant of nature
> > that will betray these six seconds when observed from the earth. Perhaps
> > the ratio of hydrogen to helium spectra or something. Run along now and
> > bring us such data.
> >
> Absolutely. That time dilation produces a redshift in spectra from sources
> at the surface of the sun, though you have to be careful what you mean by
> “surface” since most photons are produced in the photosphere.
>
> But in terms of changing anything about local physics processes, you’re out
> of luck, for obvious reasons. (For the obvious reasons, consider the fact
> that cesium atoms do not behave any differently at GPS altitudes.)

Violation of First Postulate. The cesium atoms must do all things slower on the sun or GR is a lie.
>
> --
> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> wrote:
> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 1:24:20 PM UTC-7, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> patdolan <patd...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> Bodkin, my boy, according to GR there is a time dilation of 6 seconds per
>>> year at the surface of the sun. There must be some constant of nature
>>> that will betray these six seconds when observed from the earth. Perhaps
>>> the ratio of hydrogen to helium spectra or something. Run along now and
>>> bring us such data.
>>>
>> Absolutely. That time dilation produces a redshift in spectra from sources
>> at the surface of the sun, though you have to be careful what you mean by
>> “surface” since most photons are produced in the photosphere.
>>
>> But in terms of changing anything about local physics processes, you’re out
>> of luck, for obvious reasons. (For the obvious reasons, consider the fact
>> that cesium atoms do not behave any differently at GPS altitudes.)
>
> Violation of First Postulate. The cesium atoms must do all things slower
> on the sun or GR is a lie.

What’s exactly do you think the first postulate states?

>>
>> --
>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> wrote:

> Bodkin, my boy, according to GR there is a time dilation of 6 seconds per
>year at the surface of the sun. There must be some constant of nature
>that will betray these six seconds when observed from the earth.
>Perhaps the ratio of hydrogen to helium spectra or something. Run
>along now and bring us such data.

Yes, it shows up as red-shift of all spectral lines.
But it is very difficult to observe for the Sun,
because the 'surface' is highly turbulent.
The line broadening by Doppler shifts is much larger.

It is easier to observe in very heavy stars,
as done already in the 1920ies,

Jan

On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 2:35:17 PM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> patdolan <patd...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > Bodkin, my boy, according to GR there is a time dilation of 6 seconds per
> >year at the surface of the sun. There must be some constant of nature
> >that will betray these six seconds when observed from the earth.
> >Perhaps the ratio of hydrogen to helium spectra or something. Run
> >along now and bring us such data.
> Yes, it shows up as red-shift of all spectral lines.
> But it is very difficult to observe for the Sun,
> because the 'surface' is highly turbulent.
> The line broadening by Doppler shifts is much larger.
>
> It is easier to observe in very heavy stars,
> as done already in the 1920ies,
>
> Jan
Hearsay. Prove it.

patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> wrote:
> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 2:35:17 PM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>> patdolan <patd...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Bodkin, my boy, according to GR there is a time dilation of 6 seconds per
>>> year at the surface of the sun. There must be some constant of nature
>>> that will betray these six seconds when observed from the earth.
>>> Perhaps the ratio of hydrogen to helium spectra or something. Run
>>> along now and bring us such data.
>> Yes, it shows up as red-shift of all spectral lines.
>> But it is very difficult to observe for the Sun,
>> because the 'surface' is highly turbulent.
>> The line broadening by Doppler shifts is much larger.
>>
>> It is easier to observe in very heavy stars,
>> as done already in the 1920ies,
>>
>> Jan
> Hearsay. Prove it.
>

“I can think of a thousand different things that would be good tests of a
theory. A THOUSAND! But heck no, I’m not going to actually go look to see
if anyone’s done them. That’d be WORK! What do you think I am, a PHYSICIST
or something? Hell no! I’d rather bait a physicist to do the research for
me, just because I ask.”

When I was in college, a friend of my roommate happened to be in the same
philosophy class as I was. He spent 100 hours inventing a way to cheat on a
minor test that he could have passed with 30 hours of studying.

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

patdolan wrote:
>
> Bodkin, my boy, according to GR there is a time dilation of 6 seconds per year at the surface of the sun.

The question no one wants to answer is...WHEN does the time dilation of 6 seconds per year at the surface of the sun occur????

Is it during the summer?

Is it one second every other month??

Is it all the 6 seconds stretch out through out the year??

Is it 6 seconds in one day, then which day, on a Friday???

Some time next week????

When?

WHEN does the time dilation of 6 seconds per year at the surface of the sun occurs????

When?

--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge
the unchallengeable.

On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 4:12:36 PM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
> patdolan wrote:
> >
> > Bodkin, my boy, according to GR there is a time dilation of 6 seconds per year at the surface of the sun.
> The question no one wants to answer is...WHEN does the time dilation of 6 seconds per year at the surface of the sun occur????
>
> Is it during the summer?
>
> Is it one second every other month??
>
> Is it all the 6 seconds stretch out through out the year??
>
> Is it 6 seconds in one day, then which day, on a Friday???
>
>
> Some time next week????
>
> When?
>
> WHEN does the time dilation of 6 seconds per year at the surface of the sun occurs????
>
>
>
> When?
>
>
>
> Another question Starmaker: Is the sun spinning on its axis 6 seconds worth of arc less each year than it would spin if it were only a thin shell of aluminum and not so massive?

What about massive neutron stars spinning at 60Hz? Would they spin at 70Hz if they were not so massive and so time-dilatinaceous?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge
> the unchallengeable.

patdolan wrote:
> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 2:35:17 PM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>> patdolan <patd...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Bodkin, my boy, according to GR there is a time dilation of 6 seconds per
>>> year at the surface of the sun. There must be some constant of nature
>>> that will betray these six seconds when observed from the earth.
>>> Perhaps the ratio of hydrogen to helium spectra or something. Run
>>> along now and bring us such data.
>> Yes, it shows up as red-shift of all spectral lines.
>> But it is very difficult to observe for the Sun,
>> because the 'surface' is highly turbulent.
>> The line broadening by Doppler shifts is much larger.
>>
>> It is easier to observe in very heavy stars,
>> as done already in the 1920ies,
>>
>> Jan
> Hearsay. Prove it.

Well, for most people, including scientists, most experimental results
are "hearsay", but heard from people you trust, and have good reasons
to trust.

You don't drink bleach at breakfast right? Because of "hearsays", maybe
you should ignore them.

On Friday, 15 April 2022 at 03:42:50 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> patdolan wrote:
> > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 2:35:17 PM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >> patdolan <patd...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Bodkin, my boy, according to GR there is a time dilation of 6 seconds per
> >>> year at the surface of the sun. There must be some constant of nature
> >>> that will betray these six seconds when observed from the earth.
> >>> Perhaps the ratio of hydrogen to helium spectra or something. Run
> >>> along now and bring us such data.
> >> Yes, it shows up as red-shift of all spectral lines.
> >> But it is very difficult to observe for the Sun,
> >> because the 'surface' is highly turbulent.
> >> The line broadening by Doppler shifts is much larger.
> >>
> >> It is easier to observe in very heavy stars,
> >> as done already in the 1920ies,
> >>
> >> Jan
> > Hearsay. Prove it.
> Well, for most people, including scientists, most experimental results

Oh, stinker Python is opening its muzzle again,
and trying to pretend he knows something.
Tell me, poor stinker, what is your definition of
a "theory" in the terms of Peano arithmetic?
See: if a theorem is going to be a part of a theory,
it has to be formulable in the language of the
theory. Do you get it? Or are you too stupid even for
that, poor stinker?

The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> patdolan wrote:
> >
> > Bodkin, my boy, according to GR there is a time dilation of 6 seconds
> > per year at the surface of the sun.
>
> The question no one wants to answer is...WHEN does the time dilation of 6
> seconds per year at the surface of the sun occur????

Huh? You have been told over and over.
The clock on the surface runs slightly slower,
(as compared to a clock out at infinity)
and that 6 seconds is the cumulative diference
over a year.

No different from comparing two quartz watches
with a slightly different rate,

Jan

On Friday, 15 April 2022 at 11:02:26 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> > patdolan wrote:
> > >
> > > Bodkin, my boy, according to GR there is a time dilation of 6 seconds
> > > per year at the surface of the sun.
> >
> > The question no one wants to answer is...WHEN does the time dilation of 6
> > seconds per year at the surface of the sun occur????
> Huh? You have been told over and over.
> The clock on the surface runs slightly slower,

Well, he has also been told over and over that
it's a bullshit and the clocks run always at the
same proper rate.
Like any other bunch of fanatic morons - apart
of being obviously right you're unable to agree
on anything.

Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Friday, 15 April 2022 at 11:02:26 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> >
> > > patdolan wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Bodkin, my boy, according to GR there is a time dilation of 6 seconds
> > > > per year at the surface of the sun.
> > >
> > > The question no one wants to answer is...WHEN does the time dilation of 6
> > > seconds per year at the surface of the sun occur????
> > Huh? You have been told over and over.
> > The clock on the surface runs slightly slower,
>
> Well, he has also been told over and over that
> it's a bullshit and the clocks run always at the
> same proper rate.

Yes, they do run at their own proper rate, in their own frame,
and their rates do differ when seen from elsewhere.
That's relativistic spacetime for you.

Learn about it, get used to it,

Jan

On Friday, 15 April 2022 at 13:17:06 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Friday, 15 April 2022 at 11:02:26 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > patdolan wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Bodkin, my boy, according to GR there is a time dilation of 6 seconds
> > > > > per year at the surface of the sun.
> > > >
> > > > The question no one wants to answer is...WHEN does the time dilation of 6
> > > > seconds per year at the surface of the sun occur????
> > > Huh? You have been told over and over.
> > > The clock on the surface runs slightly slower,
> >
> > Well, he has also been told over and over that
> > it's a bullshit and the clocks run always at the
> > same proper rate.
> Yes, they do run at their own proper rate, in their own frame,

In the dreams of brainwashed idiots, but not in the real
GPS. The reality piss at your ideological delusions.

> and their rates do differ when seen from elsewhere.

It's not what pure relativistic maniacs like Tom R say.

Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Friday, 15 April 2022 at 13:17:06 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Friday, 15 April 2022 at 11:02:26 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > > The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > patdolan wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Bodkin, my boy, according to GR there is a time dilation of 6
> > > > > > seconds per year at the surface of the sun.
> > > > >
> > > > > The question no one wants to answer is...WHEN does the time
> > > > > dilation of 6 seconds per year at the surface of the sun occur????
> > > > Huh? You have been told over and over.
> > > > The clock on the surface runs slightly slower,
> > >
> > > Well, he has also been told over and over that
> > > it's a bullshit and the clocks run always at the
> > > same proper rate.
> > Yes, they do run at their own proper rate, in their own frame,
>
> In the dreams of brainwashed idiots, but not in the real
> GPS. The reality piss at your ideological delusions.
>
> > and their rates do differ when seen from elsewhere.
>
> It's not what pure relativistic maniacs like Tom R say.

I can't speak for Tom R,
but I don't think there is a difference of opinion here.

An observer on earth, measuring wavelengths of spectral lines,
or frequencies of hyperfine transitions, or anything physical at all
will measure the same results in his laboratory as an observer
having his (perfectly isolated thermally!) laboratory on the sun.

-And- that observer on Earth will see those same spectral lines
of light coming from the sun as red-shifted wrt to his own,
and that clock on the sun ticking slower, and idem for all of physics.

All of this just as predicted by Einstein,
and verified over and over again in experiments,
to very great precision nowadays.
(gravitational red shift is one of the three classic tests)

The problem isn't with the physics,
it is with your failure to understand it,

Jan

J. J. Lodder wrote:

> An observer on earth, measuring wavelengths of spectral lines,
> or frequencies of hyperfine transitions, or anything physical at all will
> measure the same results in his laboratory as an observer having his
> (perfectly isolated thermally!) laboratory on the sun.
>
> -And- that observer on Earth will see those same spectral lines of light
> coming from the sun as red-shifted wrt to his own,
> and that clock on the sun ticking slower, and idem for all of physics.
>
> All of this just as predicted by Einstein,

Stop being so foolish.

On Friday, 15 April 2022 at 14:08:50 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Friday, 15 April 2022 at 13:17:06 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Friday, 15 April 2022 at 11:02:26 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > > > The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > patdolan wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Bodkin, my boy, according to GR there is a time dilation of 6
> > > > > > > seconds per year at the surface of the sun.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The question no one wants to answer is...WHEN does the time
> > > > > > dilation of 6 seconds per year at the surface of the sun occur????
> > > > > Huh? You have been told over and over.
> > > > > The clock on the surface runs slightly slower,
> > > >
> > > > Well, he has also been told over and over that
> > > > it's a bullshit and the clocks run always at the
> > > > same proper rate.
> > > Yes, they do run at their own proper rate, in their own frame,
> >
> > In the dreams of brainwashed idiots, but not in the real
> > GPS. The reality piss at your ideological delusions.
> >
> > > and their rates do differ when seen from elsewhere.
> >
> > It's not what pure relativistic maniacs like Tom R say.
> I can't speak for Tom R,
> but I don't think there is a difference of opinion here.

That's because you're a blind, fanatic idiot. And lying too,
because I remember your discussion here with Tom quite
well, and google keeps the record.
Do you also deny that GPS caesium clocks on satellites
run at ~9 192 631 774 rate instead 9 192 631 770?
And Earth is flat.

Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday, 15 April 2022 at 13:17:06 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Friday, 15 April 2022 at 11:02:26 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>> The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> patdolan wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bodkin, my boy, according to GR there is a time dilation of 6 seconds
>>>>>> per year at the surface of the sun.
>>>>>
>>>>> The question no one wants to answer is...WHEN does the time dilation of 6
>>>>> seconds per year at the surface of the sun occur????
>>>> Huh? You have been told over and over.
>>>> The clock on the surface runs slightly slower,
>>>
>>> Well, he has also been told over and over that
>>> it's a bullshit and the clocks run always at the
>>> same proper rate.
>> Yes, they do run at their own proper rate, in their own frame,
>
> In the dreams of brainwashed idiots, but not in the real
> GPS. The reality piss at your ideological delusions.
>
>> and their rates do differ when seen from elsewhere.
>
> It's not what pure relativistic maniacs like Tom R say.
>

That’s not correct. Tom R has said the same thing.
But some people cannot parse what’s said here, which is one reason this is
not a good place to try to learn relativity. But some people cannot figure
that out either.

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

On Friday, 15 April 2022 at 14:36:07 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Friday, 15 April 2022 at 13:17:06 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Friday, 15 April 2022 at 11:02:26 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >>>> The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> patdolan wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Bodkin, my boy, according to GR there is a time dilation of 6 seconds
> >>>>>> per year at the surface of the sun.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The question no one wants to answer is...WHEN does the time dilation of 6
> >>>>> seconds per year at the surface of the sun occur????
> >>>> Huh? You have been told over and over.
> >>>> The clock on the surface runs slightly slower,
> >>>
> >>> Well, he has also been told over and over that
> >>> it's a bullshit and the clocks run always at the
> >>> same proper rate.
> >> Yes, they do run at their own proper rate, in their own frame,
> >
> > In the dreams of brainwashed idiots, but not in the real
> > GPS. The reality piss at your ideological delusions.
> >
> >> and their rates do differ when seen from elsewhere.
> >
> > It's not what pure relativistic maniacs like Tom R say.
> >
> That’s not correct. Tom R has said the same thing.

No, he hasn't.

> But some people cannot parse what’s said here,

That's right.

> which is one reason this is
> not a good place to try to learn relativity.

Well, your opinion is worthless, like always.
It's a perfect place to learn what The Shit really is.

On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 3:37:43 PM UTC-5, patdolan wrote:
> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 1:24:20 PM UTC-7, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:

> > But in terms of changing anything about local physics processes, you’re out
> > of luck, for obvious reasons. (For the obvious reasons, consider the fact
> > that cesium atoms do not behave any differently at GPS altitudes.)
> Violation of First Postulate. The cesium atoms must do all things slower on the sun or GR is a lie.

False. We *OBSERVE* the frequency of the hyperfine transition of
the cesium atoms as being red-shifted, but the cesium atoms do
not, in fact, go any slower. Nothing physically happens to the
cesium atoms. The properties of the atoms have *NOT* changed.

Sort of an analogous situation from over a century ago, with length
contraction. Lorentz believed that length contraction represented
a physical contraction of the constituents of matter, and so
expected that strain from the contraction should be observable in
experiments such as ones measuring birefringence of transparent
objects:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experiments_of_Rayleigh_and_Brace
or measurable changes in resistance detectable by a sensitive
Wheatstone bridge:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trouton%E2%80%93Rankine_experiment

Lorentz was rather chagrined that such experiments were
persistently negative.

On Friday, 15 April 2022 at 17:34:46 UTC+2, prokaryotic.c...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 3:37:43 PM UTC-5, patdolan wrote:
> > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 1:24:20 PM UTC-7, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > But in terms of changing anything about local physics processes, you’re out
> > > of luck, for obvious reasons. (For the obvious reasons, consider the fact
> > > that cesium atoms do not behave any differently at GPS altitudes.)
> > Violation of First Postulate. The cesium atoms must do all things slower on the sun or GR is a lie.
> False. We *OBSERVE* the frequency of the hyperfine transition of
> the cesium atoms as being red-shifted, but the cesium atoms do
> not, in fact, go any slower.

See, JJ?

On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 10:48:54 AM UTC-5, maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, 15 April 2022 at 17:34:46 UTC+2, prokaryotic.c...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 3:37:43 PM UTC-5, patdolan wrote:
> > > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 1:24:20 PM UTC-7, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > > But in terms of changing anything about local physics processes, you’re out
> > > > of luck, for obvious reasons. (For the obvious reasons, consider the fact
> > > > that cesium atoms do not behave any differently at GPS altitudes.)
> > > Violation of First Postulate. The cesium atoms must do all things slower on the sun or GR is a lie.
> > False. We *OBSERVE* the frequency of the hyperfine transition of
> > the cesium atoms as being red-shifted, but the cesium atoms do
> > not, in fact, go any slower.
> See, JJ?

What's there for him to see? He knows perfectly well what
I am talking about. It is only *YOU* in your ignorance who
believes that JJ and I have any sort of disagreement.

J. J. Lodder wrote:
>
> The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> > patdolan wrote:
> > >
> > > Bodkin, my boy, according to GR there is a time dilation of 6 seconds
> > > per year at the surface of the sun.
> >
> > The question no one wants to answer is...WHEN does the time dilation of 6
> > seconds per year at the surface of the sun occur????
>
> Huh? You have been told over and over.
> The clock on the surface runs slightly slower,
> (as compared to a clock out at infinity)
> and that 6 seconds is the cumulative diference
> over a year.

I'm not good at math...

How much is 6 seconds divided by a year? What does that come out to in
numbers?

--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge
the unchallengeable.

On Friday, 15 April 2022 at 17:56:35 UTC+2, prokaryotic.c...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 10:48:54 AM UTC-5, maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Friday, 15 April 2022 at 17:34:46 UTC+2, prokaryotic.c...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 3:37:43 PM UTC-5, patdolan wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, April 14, 2022 at 1:24:20 PM UTC-7, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > > But in terms of changing anything about local physics processes, you’re out
> > > > > of luck, for obvious reasons. (For the obvious reasons, consider the fact
> > > > > that cesium atoms do not behave any differently at GPS altitudes.)
> > > > Violation of First Postulate. The cesium atoms must do all things slower on the sun or GR is a lie.
> > > False. We *OBSERVE* the frequency of the hyperfine transition of
> > > the cesium atoms as being red-shifted, but the cesium atoms do
> > > not, in fact, go any slower.
> > See, JJ?
> What's there for him to see? He knows perfectly well what

He said:
> > > and their rates do differ when seen from elsewhere.
> >
I said:

> > It's not what pure relativistic maniacs like Tom R say.
or you.

And that he was wrong is for him to see, poor fanatic
halfbrain.