You are an embarrassment to the RE.

They will never forgive you for this.

You should have stayed in AR, here you are more than useless.

*That is possibly because any changes due to the solar gravitational potential effect are too small to register.*You must be dreaming.

http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Ronald_Hatch/Hatch-Relativity_and_GPS-II_1995.pdfIt is very important to note that the GPS satellites' clock rate and the

receiver's clock rate are not adjusted as a function of their velocity relative to one

another. Instead, they are adjusted as a function of their velocity with respect to the

chosen frame of reference—in this case the earth-centered, non- rotating, (quasi) inertial

frame.

N. Ashby tried to make a similar claim.

Ashby’s claim is equivalent to the claim

found elsewhere [22] that the local frame rotates with the

orbit and that the sun’s differential gravitational potential

is canceled by “centripetal acceleration,” i.e. by the

differential velocity with respect to the sun. In other

words, it is claimed that the inertial frame indeed rotates

once per year. However, the GPS clocks clearly show

this argument is not valid. The orientation of the GPS

orbital planes does not rotate to maintain the same angle

with respect to the sun, so there is no differential velocity

orthogonal to the orbital plane. And there can be no

differential velocity within the orbital plane or else

Kepler’s laws would be violated. Thus, GPS clocks do not

suffer centripetal acceleration. Furthermore, if this

argument were correct, the differential gravitational

potential would be canceled in the sun’s frame as well.

The JPL reference document [7] and the Hill pulsar

document [19] clearly show that such a cancellation does

not occur.

http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Ronald_Hatch/Hatch-Clock_Behavior_and_theSearch_for_an_Underlying_Mechanism_for_Relativistic_Phenomena_2002.pdfYOU HAVE FAILED TO ADDRESS THE GRAVITATIONAL POTENTIAL ANOMALY INHERENT IN GPS TECHNOLOGY:

Many people believe that GR accounts for all the observed

effects caused by gravitational fields. However, in

reality GR is unable to explain an increasing number of

clear observational facts, several of them discovered recently

with the help of the GPS. For instance, GR

predicts the gravitational time dilation and the slowing of

the rate of clocks by the gravitational potential of Earth,

of the Sun, of the galaxy etc. Due to the gravitational

time dilation of the solar gravitational potential, clocks in

the GPS satellites having their orbital plane nearly parallel

to the Earth-Sun axis should undergo a 12 hour period

harmonic variation in their rate so that the difference

between the delay accumulated along the half of the orbit

closest to the Sun amounts up to about 24 ns in the time

display, which would be recovered along the half of the

orbit farthest from the Sun. Such an oscillation exceeds

the resolution of the measurements by more than two

orders of magnitude and, if present, would be very easily

observed. Nevertheless, contradicting the predictions of

GR, no sign of such oscillation is observed. This is the

well known and so long unsolved non-midnight problem.

In fact observations show that the rate of the

atomic clocks on Earth and in the 24 GPS satellites is

ruled by only and exclusively the Earth’s gravitational

field and that effects of the solar gravitational potential

are completely absent. Surprisingly and happily the GPS

works better than expected from the TR.

Obviously the gravitational

slowing of the atomic clocks on Earth cannot be due to

relative velocity because these clocks rest with respect to

the laboratory observer. What is immediately disturbing

here is that two completely distinct physical causes produce

identical effects, which by it alone is highly suspicious.

GR gives only a geometrical interpretation to the

gravitational time dilation. However, if motions cause

time dilation, why then does the orbital motion of Earth

suppress the time dilation caused by the solar gravitational

potential on the earthbased and GPS clocks? Absurdly

in one case motion causes time dilation and in the

other case it suppresses it. This contradiction lets evident

that what causes the gravitational time dilation is not the

gravitational potential and that moreover this time dilation

cannot be caused by a scalar quantity. If the time dilation

shown by the atomic clocks within the earthbased

laboratories is not due to the gravitational potential and

cannot be due to relative velocity too then it is necessarily

due to some other cause. This impasse once more

puts in check the central idea of the TR, according to

which the relative velocity with respect to the observer is

the physical parameter that rules the effects of motions.

The above facts show that the parameter that rules the

effects of motions is not relative velocity but a velocity

of a more fundamental nature.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1784780#msg1784780*but who accepts the local ether model?*Every scientist who is faced with the fact that the GPS satellites do not record/register the orbital Sagnac effect must accept eventually the Lorentz ether model.

*C.C. Su certainly accepts the reality of the Earth rotating and orbiting the Sun, so completely ignore I'll your attempt to use his work to disprove those things!*Dr. Su just presented ABSOLUTE PROOFS that the GPS satellites do not record the ORBITAL SAGNAC EFFECT.

His papers are published in the most respected journals.

However, if the GPS satellites do not record the ORBITAL SAGNAC, then obviously the Earth is not orbiting the Sun.

Very simple to understand.

That is why HE IS FORCED TO ACCEPT THE LOCAL-AETHER MODEL.

But this contradicts each and every statement ever made by Newton or by Einstein.

EVERYONE ACCEPTS THE EXISTENCE OF THE MISSING ORBITAL SAGNAC EFFECT.

LISA Space Antenna

The LISA interferometer rotates both around its own axis and around the Sun as well, at the same time.

That is, the interferometer will be subjected to BOTH the rotational Sagnac (equivalent to the Coriolis effect) and the orbital Sagnac effects.

Given the huge cost of the entire project, the best experts in the field (CalTech, ESA) were called upon to provide the necessary theoretical calculations for the total phase shift of the interferometer. To everyone's surprise, and for the first time since Sagnac and Michelson and Gale, it was found that the ORBITAL SAGNAC EFFECT is much greater than the CORIOLIS EFFECT.

The factor of proportionality is R/L (R = radius of rotation, L = length of the side of the interferometer).

Algebraic approach to time-delay data analysis: orbiting case

K Rajesh Nayak and J-Y Vinet

https://www.cosmos.esa.int/documents/946106/1027345/TDI_FOR_.PDF/2bb32fba-1b8a-438d-9e95-bc40c32debbeThis is an IOP article, published by the prestigious journal Classic and Quantum Gravity:

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0264-9381/22/10/040/metaIn this work, we estimate the effects due to the Sagnac phase by taking the realistic model for LISA orbital motion.

This work is organized as follows: in section 2, we make an estimate of Sagnac phase

for individual laser beams of LISA by taking realistic orbital motion. Here we show that, in general, the residual laser noise because of Sagnac phase is much larger than earlier estimates.

For the LISA geometry, R⊙/L is of the order 30 and the orbital contribution to the Sagnac phase is larger by this factor.

The computations carried out by Dr. R.K. Nayak (over ten papers published on the subject) and Dr. J.Y. Vinet (Member of the LISA International Science Team), and published by prestigious scientific journals and by ESA, show that the orbital Sagnac is 30 times greater than the rotational Sagnac for LISA.

The MISSING ORBITAL SAGNAC EFFECT IS A FACT OF SCIENCE, ACCEPTED BY BOTH NASA AND ESA AND CALTECH.

Now, we are back to your catastrophic derivation and comparison.

Of course, the surface gravity of the Sun is roughly 274 m/s^{2}!

And here is another way to check that 274 m/s^{2} value for the Sun's surface gravity.

Average distance from earth to Sun: 149,597,870,000 m.

*Radius of Sun*: 695,510,000 m

*Sidereal year*: 31,558,150 secs

Hence *Earth's orbital Angular Velocity* = 2 x π / (Sidereal year) = 1.99099E-07 rad/s

Hence *Earth's centripetal Acceleration about Sun* = (1.99099 x 10^{-7})^{2} x (149,597,870,000) = 0.005930 m/s^{2}.

But the (*Sun's gravity at the Earth*) = (*Earth's centripetal Acceleration about Sun*) = 0.005930 m/s^{2}.

Now the gravity due to the Sun decreases as 1/(*distance from the sun*)^{2}.

The Earth is 149,597,870,000 m from the Sun's centre and the Sun's surface is 695,510,000 m from the Sun's centre.

Therefore the Sun's gravity at its surface = 0.005930 x (149,597,870,000/695,510,000)^{2} =** 274.35 m/s**^{2} - *QED*.

So that agrees quite well with the surface g of the Sun as calculated from its mass, radius and the *Universal Gravitational Constant* - funny that!

Therefore, the value of 274 m/s2 RESTS ENTIRELY ON THIS STATEMENT:

*Hence Earth's orbital Angular Velocity = 2 x π / (Sidereal year) = 1.99099E-07 rad/s*If the Earth is not orbiting the Sun, a(sun) DOES NOT equal 274.35m/s2: IN FACT IT IS EQUAL TO ZERO.

Then, we are left with the centrifugal acceleration: a

_{c} = 0.0063 m/s

^{2}.

Thus, the Clayton model is fully vindicated, as is all of the information I have provided in this thread.

GPS satellites DO NOT REGISTER/RECORD THE ORBITAL SAGNAC EFFECT.

This is a fact of science.

Then, the Earth is not orbiting the Sun at all.

As for the scienceforums link, I WAS THE ONE WHO MENTIONED IT, remember?

Let's go to page 1 of that link.

https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/118524-globalgeneralized-sagnac-effect-formula/#commentsA total disaster for the "physicists" at scienceforums.

They are unable to mount any kind of a defense.

Their star, swansontea, cannot explain anything at all.

Page 2

https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/118524-globalgeneralized-sagnac-effect-formula/page/2/#commentsA huge disaster for scienceforums: they resort to trolling to escape the unavoidable conclusions.

Page 3

https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/118524-globalgeneralized-sagnac-effect-formula/page/3/#commentsA total disaster for scienceforums: they cannot explain the fact that the SAGNAC EFFECT does not feature any area at all.

So, they are forced to close the thread.

As for the comments of the mods, they do this with every thread they close, in order to convey a positive image for themselves, but the thread speaks for itself: they were unable to explain the formulas I presented.

rabinoz linked the MISSING ORBITAL SAGNAC EFFECT WITH THE 274 M/S2 FIGURE.

Since the GPS satellites do not register the MISSING ORBITAL SAGNAC, the Earth is not orbiting the Sun at all.

Therefore a(sun) = ZERO.