Mixing forcefields into GR is a mistake. What he says on page 3 "As the change in the particles velocity is determined by the force influence on the particle, it follows from here that...force...is the reason for change in the course of time......" is a completely bogus assumption. For GR the radially freefalling frame is an inertial frame where any relative change in locally measured proper time intervals is due to changing spacetime geometry. GR is just a model and it has been shown that you can get the same result using torsion in a flat spacetime. Neither model proofs what gravity is [spacetime curvature, force, torsion, little invisible purple dudes, etc]...they just model how stuff behaves when gravity is present. Apparently Kozyrev claims to have shown that time has 'physical properties' and maybe this is what this guy is working toward but I can't get past his assumption that 'force' is 'the' reason for a change in the course of time [in other words I didn't read to much further]. On another note I 'killfiled' Pearson. He is the only person I have ever 'killfiled'. Don't read his bs [thats the reason for hiding him] just a suggestion. Would you consider the act of measuring time intervals is a physical act that defines a certain physical property of time [that it is measurable]?

• The cautious tone of science is always missing - whomi - June 12, 2003 - 04:30 UTC
• We seem to be in agreement on everything - yanniru - June 12, 2003 - 11:13 UTC
  • Re: Yanniru's statement in reference to "slashed together" - whomi - June 12, 2003 - 18:16 UTC
  • What Yanniru is agreeing to...is not the Golden Rule - whomi - June 12, 2003 - 19:50 UTC