The disagreement is that LeGrande is claiming that at any given instant, the sun's apparent position is lagged behind it's actual(and gravitational) angular position by about 2.1 degrees due to the earth's rotation rate of 2.1 degrees during the ~8.3 minutes it takes light to reach the earth from the sun. He'd be absolutely right if the sun orbited the earth - but it pretty much doesn't. [excerpt]There is something very fishy going on here...
The two body example is a good one. If one is completely stationary, its optical image will be aligned with is gravitation pull.Why did he agree?
Viewing the orbiting planet from the stationary planet will cause the optical image of the orbiting planet to lag its gravitational pull.
By definition of course there is a difference, but it is the same difference between accelerating at one G or being in the Earths gravitational field. The result is the same, it is a distinction without a difference. [excerpt]To which I replied:
There is a distinction.And then to my statement about creating the appearance of angular motion, he replied:
They are the same in that they both create the appearance of angular motion.
But only one is detectable with a laser ring gyro.
Thank you, my job is done : )
I read your post. It is meaningless and a total distortion of any sense of reality.
I guess it is back to the basics to relieve you from your confused state. It takes about 8.3 seconds for the light to travel from the sun to earth. In that 8.3 seconds the earth rotates approximately 2.1 degrees.
Please tell me the difference between what an observer on a stationary Earth with the Sun orbiting the Earth every 24 hours or if both the Earth and the Sun are stationary except that the Earth is rotating every 24 hours, sees?