Message 1007 from Uncle Al, 24 February 2003 04:39:
In response to message 1005: A New Column named [The Vortex Theroy] Grandly Opened from The MiniEPostOffice , 24 February 2003:
"The Vortex Theory is based upon the hypothesis that time does not exist as a fundamental principle of the universe, but instead, only exists as a phenomenon created by motion, a “shadow” of motion."
That won't fly at all. All motion is relative, and trivially so. Your "Vortex Theory" would arbitrarily differ in predictions for any two inertial observers that weren't trivially identical - especially if they were relativistic. And what of identical inertial observers?
1) All tests of Special and General Relativity give the predicted answers, including the daily running of almost a hundred particle accelerators plus mssive astronomical observations,
Experimental constraints on General Relativity.
2) The Global Posiitoning Satellite System - both US and Russian - is exquisite confirmation of the validity of both General and Special Relativity,
Relativity in the GPS system
If your "Vortex Theory" does not agree with General Relativity in every observation made to date, "Vortex Theory" is wrong. If "Vortex Theory" cannot make a prediction counter to a prediction of General Relativity, it is useless.
"At the time of launch of the NTS-2 satellite (23 June 1977), which contained the first Cesium atomic clock to be placed
in orbit, it was recognized that orbiting clocks would require a relativistic correction, but there was uncertainty as to its
magnitude as well as its sign. Indeed, there were some who doubted that relativistic effects were truths that would need
to be incorporated [1]! A frequency synthesizer was built into the satellite clock system so that after launch, if in fact the
rate of the clock in its final orbit was that predicted by general relativity, then the synthesizer could be turned on,
bringing the clock to the coordinate rate necessary for operation. After the Cesium clock was turned on in NTS-2, it was
operated for about 20 days to measure its clock rate before turning on the synthesizer [2]. The frequency measured
during that interval was +442.5 parts in 10^12 compared to clocks on the ground, while general relativity predicted
+446.5 parts in10^12 . The difference was well within the accuracy capabilities of the orbiting clock. This then gave
about a 1% verification of the combined second-order Doppler and gravitational frequency shift effects for a clock at
4.2 earth radii."
[1] Alley, C., ``Proper time experiments in gravitational fields with atomic clocks, aircraft, and laser light pulses'', in Meystre, P., and Scully, M. O., eds., Quantum Optics, Experimental Gravity, and Measurement Theory, Proc. NATO Advanced Study Institute on Quantum Optics and Experimental General Relativity, August 1981, Bad Windsheim, Germany, 363, (Plenum Press, New York, 1983).
[2] Buisson, J.A., Easton, R.L., and McCaskill, T.B., ``Initial Results of the NAVSTAR GPS NTS-2 Satellite'', in Rueger, L. et al., ed., Proceedings of the 9th Annual Precise Time and Time Interval Applications and Planning Meeting, 177-200, (Technical Information and Administrative Support Division, Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD, 1977).