[aruanan]

The Sun pretty much sits in the same spot (i.e., right in the middle of the solar system), so there's no testable difference between the effect its gravity has on our orbit if "instantaneous", versus the effect it would have 8.3 minutes delayed.

If the Sun actually *were* circling the Earth in the way it *appears* to, then yeah, an 8.3 minute difference in gravity would be measurable. But then, it would also be circling us at over two million miles per hour (3% of the speed of light)...

Thanks for demonstrating a. your inability to understand what was said or b. your unwillingness to acknowledge what was said.

[Dan Day]

Thanks for demonstrating a. your inability to understand what was said or b. your unwillingness to acknowledge what was said.

I'm sorry, son, the part of your post where you actually supported your slurs by pointing out what I have allegedly misunderstood seems to have gotten lost in transit. Do try again.

After all, I'm sure you're not the sort of person who would just resort to empty insults in an attempt to distract attention from the fact that he was caught saying something unwise (especially when I was perfectly polite in my original reply to you).

You know, like mistaking the *apparent* movement of the Sun due to the Earth's rotation for an *actual* change in position of the Sun, as you did in your original post...

But hey, I'm open-minded -- please explain how it's somehow *my* mistake when you wrote:

I would think that measurements of earth's acceleration toward the sun that show a direction that is 8.3 minutes ahead of the apparent position of the sun in the sky also demonstrate a propagation speed that is virtually (at these distances) instantaneous. That is, the earth is not accelerating toward where "gravity waves" are supposedly reaching the earth together with the photons that left the sun 8.3 minutes previously but toward where the sun actually is.

The mistake here, as I already pointed out, is that the Sun isn't *actually* moving, even if the rotation of the Earth makes it look like it might be. Therefore, there's no difference at all between the Earth's vector of gravitational acceleration towards the sun EITHER WAY (i.e. whether gravity propagates at light speed, or instantaneously). EITHER WAY, the Sun's gravity well maintains the same "shape" and "position" while the Earth cruises around it.

And the "apparent position of the Sun in the sky" matters not a whit either way, since the Sun would reside in the *SAME* "apparent position" whether gravity (or even light) travelled at lightspeed, at an infinite speed, or even at a highway speed limit of 55mph.

Since the Sun ISN'T ACTUALLY MOVING, its gravity signature, and even its visual appearance via light, REMAIN THE SAME whether we're seeing it as it was a nanosecond ago, 8.3 minutes ago, or six months ago -- from *any* vantage point.

Furthermore, the "apparent position" of the Sun in the sky is due to the Earth's rotation, which is a LOCAL situation, and independent of any delay in light/gravity propagation from the Sun -- in simple terms, the only thing that would make the Sun look 8.3 minutes ahead or behind of its apparent position in the sky would be a change in the Earth's rotation itself, *not* any delay in light coming from the Sun.

So yes, please, tell me what *I've* missed...

I also eagerly await your supporting evidence for your amazing claim that there are "measurements of earth's acceleration toward the sun that show a direction that is 8.3 minutes ahead of the apparent position of the sun in the sky".