No, what's laughable is I am in the best of company.....
Einstein: "Ether and Relativity"
"Recapitulating, we may say that according to the general theory of relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists an ether. According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense. But this ether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media, as consisting of parts which may be tracked through time. The idea of motion may not be applied to it."
The only ones in violation of the reality are the ones trying to apply the idea of motion to it, of bending, expanding and accelerating.......
Another one that cant comprehend the reality of the flawed conception of the Michelson-Morely test....
Not that you'll be able to understand with your continuing to treat your frame as an absolute frame... but....
It was concluded there was no aether because of an incorrect belief in what the Michelson-Morley experiment showed. The only thing it actually showed was how easily people are fooled by incorrect conceptions. How they (and people still) failed to see that their viewpoint from outside the system being measured was flawed from the beginning.
The Michelson-Morley experiment is the biggest overlooked conceptual error of all time.
You, the observer looking at the illustration or device, are outside the illustration or device, and the illustration or device is moving with regard to you.
Feynman said: “Let us calculate the time required for the light to go to E and back. Let us say that the time for light to go from plate B to the mirror E is t1 and the time for the return is t2. While the light is on its way from B to the mirror [E], the apparatus moves a distance ut1, so light must traverse a distance of L+ut1 at the speed of c.”
Well, from your eyeballs’ point of view, looking at the illustration or device, yes. But from the point of view of the device, no. We conceptionally see the device moving, and therefore we see the extra distance ut1. But the device does not see itself moving. It has no velocity relative to itself. No object can calculate itself as moving in its own co-ordinate system. Any observer attached to the device or moving along with the device will see or measure the distance L. Period. Only an observer outside the local system would see the distance L+ut1. The device is inside its local system. The device cannot hope to measure any extra distance, or to find a phase difference at the end.
The entire experiment is founded on a conceptual error of the greatest import. The device is not moving relative to itself. There can be no phase shift because the device will never measure any distance but that of L. It will never measure the extra distance of ut1. No phase shift could ever be produced.
No system sees itself in motion. Only an outside observer would ever see the extra distance of ut1.
Just as if we built the device on the surface of the earth and spun the earth (oh wait, we already have) only an outside observer (off planet) would see the extra distance light must travel [ut1], while we (moving with the device) see it as stationary. The outside observer would expect a phase shift, while we on the earth would not. The experiment would measure the distance L and no phase shift would occurr to the astonishment of the outside observer.
The Michelson-Morley experiment is nothing but a conceptual error of profound proportions. So there has been no experiment that has shown the aether does not exist, but one of profound conceptual mistakes. So there was never any valid reason to begin with to conclude no aether existed. Just the incorrect conceptual errors of close to 130 years.
Now as for clocks on airplanes they merely confirm it is changes in velocity which affect clocks, not magical frame switching as is used in a sad attempt to explain why the twin’s clock slows….. but that so-called paradox is another profound conceptual error in a league of its own….
You mean your rubbish?
Doppler effect - Wikipedia
First let's understand that velocity has no affect on the speed of light, then let's understand what really happens.
"For waves that propagate in a medium, such as sound waves, the velocity of the observer and of the source are relative to the medium in which the waves are transmitted. The total Doppler effect may therefore result from motion of the source, motion of the observer, or motion of the medium."
Now Einstein already told you that Relativity is unthinkable without an ether, just that the idea of motion may not be applied to it, which you violate constantly..... And not only violate by applying motion to it, but try to conjure energy out of thin air.....
You just said energy wasnt conserved, make up your mind what you want to argue....
Not the least of which Both SR and GR have the conservation laws tied into the stress-energy tensor.... but if you wish to argue against those theories now, please feel free to do so. So again we see Einstein is on my side, not yours....
Noether's theorem - Wikipedia
"In special and general relativity, these apparently separate conservation laws are aspects of a single conservation law, that of the stress–energy tensor."
And in GR one must use a stress-energy tensor to describe all aspects of spacetime and mass.....
You wouldn't understand anymore than you understand with light..... since I already provided you with it once and yet here you are asking for what has already been given. Apparently you didnt read or understand it the first time so this time will be no different.....
The Doppler Effect
A New Non-Doppler Redshift
Versus your never linking to anything because nothing supports Fairie Dust except more Fairie Dust. Lol, you are a riot.....
What, you are unable to see the exact same situation with the earth as a satellite of the sun?
Really????
You are totally lost, the acceleration is centripetal, towards the center of mass. here let us illustrate........
View attachment 251850
"A
centripetal force is a force that makes a body follow a curved path. Its direction is always orthogonal to the motion of the body
and towards the fixed point of the instantaneous center of curvature of the path."
Who you trying to fool? But then that's probably why you never provide links but just keep making claims....
It is your inability to understand that acceleration adds energy which remains constant until the velocity of an object changes. learn your science.... So with every increase in acceleration energy is gained and then stays at that increased value.
Kinetic energy - Wikipedia
"In physics, the kinetic energy of an object is the energy that it possesses due to its motion. It is defined as the work needed to accelerate a body of a given mass from rest to its stated velocity. Having gained this energy during its acceleration, the body maintains this kinetic energy unless its speed changes."
You didn't learn. The accelerometer reads 9.8 meters per second per second while stationary on earth. Only while under acceleration of 9.8 meters per second per second does it read as zero. Let us reiterate that, while it is under acceleration it reads zero.....
If your best argument and insult is a spelling error, I'm doing good enough that you have to grasp for straws.... Lol....
But since were stooping to this level, say's the guy that writes centripedal instead of centripetal....
I'm not concerned at all. I understand you can only dish it out but are too weak to take it....
Answered.
Now answer how your expanding space which isnt a real velocity does the same thing as a velocity, without using Doppler since that is the velocity of the source or target, not the space in between, unless you are now claiming a medium and applying motion to it??????