Ditto on the "more of the same". Anyone argueing that one must use relavistic mathematic to evaluate Relativity is simply geing outright foolish. Obviously if one applies the mathematical rules of the theory one will get the same result. This is a more fundlemental issue. One that requires you step out of your "Guardian of the Faith" uniform and think physical reality. It seems few here have that capacity. The link you request is here: http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/relatvty.htm Don' let the lead throw you off. Scroll down to Time-Dilation. There are talking Einstein's Relativity. You are incorrect. No it isn't. Denying "Simulatneity" is entirely different than rendering it moot i.e. = "0" for the purpose of the demonstration. This is simply to offset the anticipated responses that FTL doesn't exist. It does just ask any entangled particle pair. But that does not mean I am claiming it use. I claimed simulation of the consequence of the instantaneous communication in the evaluation process. Well at least we are in partial agreement. In fact almost in total agreement. Which is strange considering how many and you continue to rant and rave about the concept being totally invalid. The point where we disagree is that you seem to think the simulation of such communication is the cause of the disparity. It is not. It merely exposes it. Big difference. If you can come to understand and accept that then you have no choice but to come to the same conclusion that I have. Relativity has a roblem. Fair point. But the problem with this position is you are setting up an arbitraty defense for the theory. If the theory does not fit realistic evaluation of physical principles, as in no impossibilities in the real world, exclusive of the theory's application of it's own unique mathematics, then you are simply claiming it is valid because its mathematics says so. You are back pedaling on common sense physics and physical realities in favor of the theory you are attempting to evaluate. It cannot be done in that fashion. It is simply false to conclude that rendering a mathematical component to zero alters the basic concept of the theory. It is nothing more than operating at the extremes where "Simultaneoity = 0". F = ma. Making a = "0" doesn't mean F = ma is no longer a valid theory it simply means there is no F or F = 0. Same principle. But you claim because of "Simultaneity" they don't stop at the same time in absolute time and we have shown that they do. You don't acknowledge that but continue to talk about simultaneity when it is no longer affective. This is not a flip-flop but it is an entirely different subject. It just happens that the cause of the "apparent" invanriance it isn't truely physically invariant. You simply draw the wrong conclusion based on that observation. I'll have to leave it there unless you want to open a topic about it. It is not a new arguement. It is fact. different sets of algothritums are collectively applied to form the mathematical circle (make it consistant). Not setting on the fence. Come to a conclusion where you conceed time dilation does not exist (or doesn't exist as per Relativity as you currently have it) and then and only then can one begin to assess the postulates and what might be their mis-interpretation. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Indeed you are correct. I was getting it right for some time. Funny my Webster 3rd College Edition doesn't have either spelling, so for now I will take your word for it. Just as many other word it may well be that their are two spellings but I'll be checking that out. In closing let me just say this discussion could be concluded if you were to simply openly agree (which you have somewhat done twice now) that the tests I have proposed, should they be possible to perform in reality (not just simulate) would mean that Relativity is either false or in need of signifigant modification. Can you do that? Yes or No. Now I hope you say yes so that we can shut this down. While I will not be content because it is my personal opinion that to simulate the instant communication affect carries the exact same weight in terms of evaluation but that can wait for another day if need be. Thanks for your time.