That simply gives an extremely brief overview of how GR formalises the notion of time.

I asked you to

*do the calculations* which describe the system being discussed. You claim a contradiction exists but you have not shown it, only asserted it. I'll repeat my request, seeing as you continue not to address it; please formulate and solve the respective geodesic equations for the two points of view being discussed and show that they lead to contradictory results. I explicitly asked you to compute geodesics, ie the paths of the observers in question. Once you have computed them

**then** the general expression for worldline time given in your link is applicable. Until then you have not addressed what I asked.

I am a little confused how you are struggling with this so much. It is so public.

*Clocks which are far from massive bodies (or at higher gravitational potentials) run faster, and clocks close to massive bodies (or at lower gravitational potentials) run slower.*
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_time_dilation

I never said otherwise. Clearly you're sufficiently stupid not to understand what GR or I actually say. Yes, GR says that clocks further from a gravitational source will tick faster than clocks closer. No one argues with that, it is one of the foundational principles upon which the GPS network is built.

You

*assert* this necessarily leads to a contradiction but you have not shown it. Using the equations you have linked to please demonstrate that two different observers moving along the world lines discussed will necessarily lead to contradictions. You have

**not** done that.

Anyway, when the high observer climbs down very slowly, his clock will have run faster than ground based clocks.

So, the high observer thinks the earth is in a different rotational position.

What clown believes this crackpottery?

**Prove it**
I ask you to do the calculations, the specific calculations pertaining to the scenario you describe, because each and every time in the past we have discussed relativity and you've asserted things you have

**always** later been shown to be wrong. You assert and assert and assert and

**never** demonstrate the validity of your claim. Each time when one of us finally gets tired of your BS and does the calculations for you it turns out you're wrong.

**ALWAYS**.

You did not answer the issue.

Do they agree on the earth's rotational position yes or no.

**You** did not answer

**me** so it's laughable you throw that complaint at someone else. You claim there is a contradiction, that they will necessarily disagree on the position of the Earth.

**Prove it**. Do the geodesic calculations. So far you have only linked to a document someone else wrote which only gives the governing equations in generality, I have asked you to

**solve** those equations for the system in question.

Why are you not doing so? Why are you avoiding this? You claim the contradiction is there, show it. Are you too stupid to understand what I'm asking you? Or are you unwilling to address what I ask you because you know you cannot do the calculations in question. Given you cannot even do special relativity I'm

*certain* you cannot do these GR calculations so all you're trying to do is avoid addressing what I've asked.

We measure time in terms of the earth's rotational and orbital positions.

Please explain your logic.

We measure time by atomic oscillation phenomena, not by the position of planets. We used to do it by the position of the planet but that has long been superseded by more rigorous methods. Besides, it is irrelevant how we measure the time, the equations of GR are all that matter. You even linked to something where the definition of what GR calls time is given. Looks like you don't even understand the concepts involved, never mind the fact you cannot do the equations.

This thread demonstrates the relativity apologists AN and RPenner are unable to explain how two clocks rejoined with SR/GR time dilation can be consistent with the time of the earth's rotation.

This proves SR/GR is a crackpot theory.

This shows how dishonest you are. How does my level of knowledge have anything to do with the consistency of GR? Besides, if me not providing calculations is proof of your position why is it that

**you** not providing proof of

**your** claims doesn't count as proof you're wrong? And besides, I've shown in numerous threads you've started that I can do relativistic calculations, each time proving that you cannot because you are shown to be wrong.

You claim there is an inconsistency, you have yet to prove it from the equations. Instead you make a bunch of assertions, disappear for a few days and make more assertions, each time ignoring the requests made of you to justify your claim.

What's the matter chinglu, can't you do the calculations yourself? You have shown you cannot do even basic special relativity problems, as well as not understanding even basic concepts within mathematics. I think you're a fraud. I think you cannot do any GR calculations pertaining to this problem, which is why you avoid any and all requests of you. I think you don't understand the workings of relativity and hence why you keep making threads like this one. I think you're

*knowingly* dishonest from the way you demand people provide details and then ignore them when they are provided. I don't think you can solve the sets of equations GR uses to describe the scenario in question and I think you'll continue to make any and all excuses you can to avoid having to admit it.

GR's description of how space, time, gravity and motion relate has been tested to high accuracy by experiments, including the GPS network. You claim an inconsistency exists,

**prove it** by

**doing the mathematical calculations**. You have been unable to justify your claims and I therefore conclude you're too stupid and dishonest to do so. I'm certain you won't prove me wrong.