Yes.. but we would never know the difference.. although if we sent a satalite to orbit on the other side of the solar system, and used some relay satalite to bouce the signal around the sun, we could probubly test it in that way..
assuming we know the exact motions of the star, galaxie, and supercluster.
for if we are in error, super cluster motion could oppose our attempted slow down.

-MT
I am however concerned about Gravity and its effect on this time flow, as is often alluded to in many cosmology concepts.

And we had to do work to make the layers? yes?
we had to do work to get order.. Just as in Fusion.
-MT

No.. its about patterns.... and when you contemplate the making of a 3D space from a zero point something...
one must realise that zero is a number.. and so is.. .99
As is.. 1.89... and the idea that we can, as in big bang, explode directly from zero to 3 is where i make an arguement.

I propose it cannot do so.. and must rise up.. threw progressive levels.

For Logic tells us.. we cannot begin with the 2nd dimension.. Unless we already have the 1st dimension.....

I.e.. Instead of a crude explosion, why not a natural progressive rise following a natural progression threw what we know of as dimensional levels.. from 0D.... to .99D... to 1D.. to 2D... to 3D... to 3.9 D.
that is four 90 degree angles.. or one full circle motion.

And we will notice that the zero D, is quite mysterious, as it must have been expansive, but how, and in what way, is still questionalble.

The 4D rise i take from Carl Sagan and others, who discuss it as Time, and still in relation to hypercubes, balloon expansion, and relativity concepts.

So if we impose the idea of what we all believe to be the 4th dimension apon a dimensional progression of VECTOR FORCES, we end up with ideas that will probubly sound like mine.

And then at 8D we see again, this step requires an expansion quality, which just so happens to fit into the pattern so far.. as seen in 0D, and 4D, then here again at 8D... this is discussed as the "Timing Scale Patterns"

do you will to discuss that specifically?
-MT

And yet the sun is not speeding up and slowing down relative to the galaxy, right?

__________________
There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand ternary, those who don't, and those waiting for a bus.
If logic doesn't work, then surely it does.

Is the Sun moving with the galaxy in its direction or against it?

and at what speeds... i.e.. it all adds up to the real speed of the earth in space.
-MT

The point is that the earth and the sun can't both be moving at the same speed relative to the fixed background that you propose is responsible for time dilation. The difference in their speeds (and therefore their time dilation) must alter over the course of a year due to the earth's orbit, according to what you've said. So according to your theory, on earth we should be able to observe this difference by observing the light from the sun redshifting and blushifting from the average over the course of a year.

__________________
There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand ternary, those who don't, and those waiting for a bus.
If logic doesn't work, then surely it does.

This has gone on quite long enough.

Mosheh, you've continued to employ meaningless terms like "applied energy" -- you cannot keep relying upon concepts which you never even defined. The closest you ever came to providing a specific meaning was here. Needless to say, that's neither sufficient nor acceptable.

Let's review.

Celestial Mechanic asked you the following:

Your reply:



This, like most of your other contributions, offers nothing but circular logic mixed with word salad.

You went on to describe in a later post (emphasis mine):

This should send you a very strong signal about what you've attempted to present here.

When asked for calculations, you've posted statements like this:

When warned by a moderator to provide calculations or anything else substantive in nature to substantiate a claim, you declined.

When warned by an administrator not to discuss your ideas on other threads (which you've done repeatedly in the past), you chose to do so anyway.

The tangental forays here delving into relativistic territory, fusion (and whatever else) are totally unnecessary given that there isn't even a house of cards upon which to base them.

Faultline hit the nail on the head in his post here; you've been made aware of this by other posters as well, myself included.

Despite being informed of the numerous problems, gaps, and contradictions in your ideas, you've subsequently attempted to latch on to any number of unrelated topics/discoveries, claiming that they're "evidence" for your model. That's simply not how science works. To be perfectly forthcoming, I don't think you understand what constitutes evidence, and that's unfortunate.

Tremendous latitude has been granted spanning many threads over the course of months. Unfortunately you've presented enough Circulus in demonstrando to last us for many more, despite the best, heroic efforts of many knowledgeable members of this community.

We're finished here, as is Mosheh Thezion's stay on this forum.