Thank you for the reply. Let's start with our pedantic concern about my use of "effect" as a verb. [...]
I didn't criticise you for using it as a verb, I criticised you for using the wrong verb. The definition you referenced makes it rather quite clear why:
verb (used with object)
10. to produce as an effect; bring about; accomplish; make happen: The new machines finally effected the transition to computerized accounting last spring.
Now, let's take your sentence:
Please verify: Do you claim that in your model the heavens interact with terrestrial objects and effect at least one terrestrial object in such a way as to explain some of the variation of g (in magnitude, direction, or both) it experiences near the FE's surface.
And apply the definition you yourself kindly provided. You asked me if the interaction between the heavens and terrestrial objects
produces, brings about, accomplishes or makes happen other terrestrial objects.
What you mean was
affect. Oh, and let's use a dictionary that actually has some credibility to it and doesn't
list words that don't exist. Anyway, here you go:
[...]
af·fect
verb \ə-ˈfekt, a-\
Definition of AFFECT
transitive verb
: to produce an effect upon: as
a : to produce a material influence upon or alteration in <paralysis affected his limbs>
b : to act upon (as a person or a person's mind or feelings) so as to produce a response : influence
Now, let's see: were you asking me if gravitation
creates (effects) objects as a result or if it
affects them? I maintain the illusion that you're a vaguely sane person, and thus it's easier for me to assume that you got the word wrong than that you were wondering if I believe that gravitation produces objects.
For more information, please visit:
http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2011/03/affect-versus-effect/Unfortunately, none of your
models are accurate representations of FET models actually subscribed to, so I cannot pick one from those.