MacM: <i>I still say such variable clock rates means Relativity must be observational and not physical reality.</i> What have I told you about observation vs. physical reality, MacM? If you think they are distinguishable, answer this question for me: <b>Please provide one test I can perform on any property of any object which will allow me to tell the difference between the "real" value of that property and its "observational" value.</b> A single example should be fine. Have you got one? <i>Physical clocks cannot posses different rates of time simultaneously and this rate view eliminates (I believe) your simultaneity arguement.</i> That view is based on nothing. It is based on your vague feeling that the "vibe" just isn't right for you. You cannot and have not backed it up with anything of substance. It has been shown to you many times that relativity says the exact opposite. You have not shown any flaws in the relativistic explanation of time dilation. Wake up, MacM. Now is the time to start learning something and give up the fantasy physics.