🚀 go-pugleaf

G. L. Bradford wrote:
> "Sam Wormley" <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message 
> news:Iohxj.52245$9j6.43603@attbi_s22...
>> Michael Helland wrote:
>>
>>> Newton defined time and the space in the Principia as having both
>>> absolute and relative natures.
>>>
>>> http://www.mnstate.edu/gracyk/courses/web%20publishing/NewtonScholium.htm
>>>
>>> Einstein fully understood and accepted both the absolute and relative
>>> natures of space and time.
>>
>>   No--Actually Einstein showed that neither time for space are rigid and
>>   absolute... that that both are malleable.
> 
>   Crystaline (Though not shatter proof.)!
> 
>   Malleable!
> 
>   Crystaline (Though not shatter proof)!
> 
>   Malleable!
> 
> .......... -- GLB
> 
>>   What is the experimental basis of Special Relativity?
>>     http://edu-observatory.org/physics-faq/Relativity/SR/experiments.html 
> 
> 

     Yup--Malleable. Take, for example, a growing crystal. The
     rate of growth is different for observers with different
     relative velocity to the growing crystal. Another example
     is a vibrating crystal oscillator.

     The observed clock's "duration of a second" depends
     on the relative velocity (and difference in gravitational
     potential) between the clock and the observer. Satellite
     clocks are an excellent example.

     Relativistic Effects on Satellite Clocks
       http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/frctfrq.png
       http://relativity.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrr-2003-1&page=node5.html