Native said:
↑
I agree on your description of the "Newtonian gravity", but i don´t think the Einsteinian model is that much better.
Einsteins "rubber sheet gravity model" and his "curvation of space-time" is highly speculative and STILL bound to the Newtonial gravity model instead of taking a new and logical approach to the very phenomenon of motions in the Universe.
Seen from the position of an object, "time dilation" is pure speculative nonsense and just a human invention. And your GPS satellites are not affected by any "gravity waves". They are just affected by the "windy slipstream" of the Earth´s rotational and orbital motion around the Sun. Possible also affected from fluctuations of the Earth´magnetic field and radiation pressure from the Sun, which is why they´re having troubles staying in position.
Regarding the "lensing", this is just light refraction and it all depends on what densities of gas and dust ithe light passes through on it´s way to the measuring instruments.
NOTE: When I´m criticising the "gravity models", I am foremostly thinking of the overall cosmological conditions and the ideas of formation as such. As for the rest, I´m criticising the very ideology behind the thoughts of the gravitational assumptions, NOT the calculations themselves.
First GR does not say satellites are effected by "gravity waves". It's time dillation from special and general relativity.
Looking at electric universe explanations of GPS corrections all I see are crank theories. In reality both relativities do not cancel out and satellite positions and times are triangulated from several sources. This is never dealt with. From the sound of your explanation you're clearly not investigating this theory in any depth.
GPS would be hundreds of meters off just like Hawking mentioned in Brief History of Time.
It's hilarious that you think "dust" accounts for weak, strong and micro lensing. You think dust causes multiple images of a single galaxy to appear a few arcsecond apart, just as relativity predicts?
With some lensing images appear with a time delay on some objects. From dust?
Time dillation has been observed in particle accelerators to a much greater degree than ever before.
Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 120405 (2014) - Test of Time Dilation Using Stored ${\mathrm{Li}}^{+}$ Ions as Clocks at Relativistic Speed
Einstein's "Time Dilation" Prediction Verified
Abstract
We present the concluding result from an Ives-Stilwell-type time dilation experiment using 7Li+ ions confined at a velocity of β=v/c=0.338 in the storage ring ESR at Darmstadt. A Λ-type three-level system within the hyperfine structure of the 7Li+3S1→3P2 line is driven by two laser beams aligned parallel and antiparallel relative to the ion beam. The lasers’ Doppler shifted frequencies required for resonance are measured with an accuracy of <4×10−9 using optical-optical double resonance spectroscopy. This allows us to verify the special relativity relation between the time dilation factor γ and the velocity β, γ√1−β2=1 to within ±2.3×10−9 at this velocity. The result, which is singled out by a high boost velocity β, is also interpreted within Lorentz invariance violating test theories.
These issues don´t need any "gravity model" at all to explain. And you don´t explain Mercury´s perihelion just by calculus. You have to know of the causal matters in order to explain things.
General Relativity uses tensors, it's a geometrical description.
Tests of general relativity - Wikipedia
The correction by 42.98″ is 3/2 multiple of classical prediction with
PPN parameters γ = β = 1 Thus the effect can be fully explained by general relativity. More recent calculations based on more precise measurements have not materially changed the situation.
In general relativity the perihelion shift
σ, expressed in radians per revolution, is approximately given by
where
L is the
semi-major axis,
T is the
orbital period,
c is the speed of light, and
e is the
orbital eccentricity (see:
Two-body problem in general relativity).
Although earlier measurements of planetary orbits were made using conventional telescopes, more accurate measurements are now made with
radar. The total observed precession of Mercury is 574.10″±0.65 per century
[7] relative to the inertial
ICRF. This precession can be attributed to the following causes:
GR predicts:
532.3035 Gravitational tugs of other solar bodies
0.0286 Oblateness of the Sun (
quadrupole moment)
42.9799 Gravitoelectric effects (Schwarzschild-like)
−0.0020
Lense–Thirring precession
575.31 Total predicted
574.10±0.65
Observed