Speed of Gravity?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jim</i>
<br />If it is instant than why not agree it is not in motion at all?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Gravity is almost instantaneous. Motion is required to get from the source mass to the target body. Nothing can affect something else at a distance without some form of agents passing between the two. That is the role played by gravitons. They carry momentum from the source mass to the target body, and the new momentum changes the motion of the target body.

So non-motion is impossible because action at a distance is logically impossible. And instantaneous action is also logically impossible because it violates the causality principle (every effect must be preceded by a cause). This is all reasoned out in my paper "Physics has its principles". [The web version is at metaresearch.org/cosmology/PhysicsHasItsPrinciples.asp ]
-|Tom|-

If gravity is not instant then the 20" stuff is not correct. The speed of gravity will be clearly noted as a difference between 20" and whatever the difference from instant is measured. For example if the distance is 19" then the speed of gravity is 20 times light.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jim</i>
<br />If gravity is not instant then the 20" stuff is not correct. The speed of gravity will be clearly noted as a difference between 20" and whatever the difference from instant is measured. For example if the distance is 19" then the speed of gravity is 20 times light.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Right. But all six experiments lack the accuracy to see any difference from zero aberration. That is why they all set lower limits to the speed of gravity instead of estimated values.

For example, the solar eclipse experiment gives a result that is close to the numbers you list. The estimated difference from the apparent Sun is about 20" +/- 1". So it sets a lower limit to the speed of gravity of 20 times the speed of light. But the upper limit allowed by the experiment is still infinity.

The most accurate experiment, binary pulsars, sets a lower limit for the speed of gravity of 20 billion times the speed of light. -|Tom|-

It is still unclear why the instant gravity solution is deleted if the data allows it to be that way. Is that simply a personal choice you make by applying the principle of causality rather than what the data shows? I think action at a distance is real without an exchange of particles. It seems a lot less messy that way and some of the oversights in modeling can be explained by that process. I did some checking and found out the 20" separation should be observed at the same distance throughout the orbit rather than vary by 3% as you say it does. It would be nice to have a link to the data that shows this in fact does or doesn't vary.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jim</i>
<br />It is still unclear why the instant gravity solution is deleted if the data allows it to be that way. Is that simply a personal choice you make by applying the principle of causality rather than what the data shows?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">I did give you the link to the article that explains this point in my previous message. In a nutshell, logic forbids anything physical from reaching infinite speeds. It has nothing to do with personal choice.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I think action at a distance is real without an exchange of particles. It seems a lot less messy that way and some of the oversights in modeling can be explained by that process.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Now that is what is known as "a personal choice".

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I did some checking and found out the 20" separation should be observed at the same distance throughout the orbit rather than vary by 3% as you say it does. It would be nice to have a link to the data that shows this in fact does or doesn't vary.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Do some more checking. Your source or your understanding of it is wrong.

The formula that gives the 20" is 206265 v/c, where the constant converts radians to arc seconds, v is the Earth's speed, and c is the speed of light. Obviously, if v varies by 3%, so does aberration.

To prove that Earth's speed varies, just use a good clock and measure the time the Sun is due south at regular intervals through the year. You will find that it happens up to 20 minutes early or late at different times of the year. The maximum speed occurs in January. So you can collect your own data and see these speed variations for yourself. -|Tom|-

Guys,

In the eastern philosophy there's two elements of center that are called Wu and Ji. So we're dealing with Tom's gravity radiating center that's 20" 'ahead' of the arbitrary barycenter of the Sun itself.

The 20" ahead center is the imaginary 'dark moon lilith' point that's the stars wagon itself. It's not really a dark moon lilith shadow point but you can see how the allegory plays through.

Anyway what I mean to say is that imagine if light speed is the max velo for materialism, then gravelocity is the speed of imagination. In this sense the gravity would be radiating from the future 20" center and the light would be radiating from the arbitrary past barycenter. So the gravitational lens is open, it just takes the light 8.3 minutes to get here.

It's like saying that rationalism's theorized in the future and empirically applied in the past flowing now. Albeit rationalism's on a gravity sled from the imagination that's applied as light in the past, presently.

As the future pulls the present along the past is held back to origin. I believe the 20" center exists but I wonder, if the Sun straight vanished, would the 20" center go with it? More likely the 20" center would vanish for the Sun to follow it in 8.3 minutes, perhaps. What if the 20" center is so well built into the space/time matrix of the quantum flux void around Sol so that it's fixed and even if the Sun disappears it can't follow, but if it tried to some 'Day after Tomorrow' stuff would happen?!

In the western philosophy the center is known as midheaven, the sun at noon, which has the symbol of MC standing for medium colei. So the gravitational MC would actually be 20" from the center of the light MC. Even with 3% variance I don't think 20" would be enough to change a sign unless it was straight on a cusp.