My dilemma

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
My point is that gravity is different -- gravity produces inertia-free acceleration.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

That's a very big "if", had gravity proved "shieldable".

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
If I retaliate for the kick by sending my pet 1000-solar-mass "black hole" in your direction, you will never see or feel it coming. Your first clue that you are about to be sucked into oblivion will be a large acceleration relative to distant objects. <img src=icon_smile.gif border=0 align=middle>
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Hadn't those dogs been outlawed at this board?
Also, after the universe, not me, sinks into oblivion, I will get hit by whatsoever is there under horizon. Not fair!

Well for the third or fourth time I aggree with you about acceleration of gravity. The point is the small mass is moved and the large mass is not moved. This result is why the large mass has tides and the small mass has velocity. You can pick on the model here since both masses are effected the same in one sense and differently in another sense.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>[Jim]: The point is the small mass is moved and the large mass is not moved.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

That statement is in error. The small mass makes the large body move too, in proportion to its own small mass. For example, both Earth and Moon raise tides on one another. Earth makes the Moon move in a large orbit, and the Moon makes the Earth move in a smaller orbit (81 times smaller, because the Moon has 81 times less mass).

So the Earth-Moon barycenter (the point that orbits the Sun in an elliptical orbit) is located about 1000 miles inside the Earth, about 1/4 of the way to the center. And the center of the Earth revolves around the barycenter once each lunar month. -|Tom|-

Tom,

Is there any consistent data on the Sun's motion wrt the Solar system barycenter? Also, is there any difference in motion of the Sun's geometric centre and its magnetic field centre?

Hardly this question belongs in this thread, but I just have no idea where to stick it.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>[AN]:Is there any consistent data on the Sun's motion wrt the Solar system barycenter? Also, is there any difference in motion of the Sun's geometric centre and its magnetic field centre?<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

The Sun's motion wrt the solar system barycenter is calculated because the barycenter cannot be observed. In fact, its location is a matter of arbitrary definition, and not of physics. For example, if we include Alpha Centauri along with the Sun and its planets in our dynamical system, the barycenter moves half-way to Alpha Centauri without any observable consequences.

I am unaware of any observable distinction between the Sun's geometric center and its magnetic field center. Such a thing might exist, as it does for planets; but I've not heard of it for the Sun. -|Tom|-

The moon then by this logic orbits 81 times faster than the Earth? So the GM=RV2 rule must be false since it indicates the moon orbits 9 times faster. And is the moon tide very much bigger than the tide on Earth?