In the UA model, how do you account for falling objects falling at different speeds based on mass and drag? It seems to me that if the ground was racing up to meet them mass/drag would be irrelevant.
The same reason as described in RET/Gravity. why wouldnt air/drag affect an object? both the air, ground and object all have an initial velocity moving upward. so of course the object coming back down would see the same effects. if you did the same test in a vacuum then yes, the results will be same, which is obvious in either RET or UA
lets argue about UA as described by FET, not someone's personal opinion about what they think UA describes.
Is the ground pushing the air up or is the air also being pushed by UA?
everything is moving up together as one, similar to RET with the spinning globe and air moving with it.
That is not an answer. Let me try again. Is UA pushing the air up or is the ground pushing the air up? "I don't know" is an acceptable answer.
Air, ground, objects would not be directly accelerated by UA. They would be indirectly accelerated. Imagine a basin of some sort that the earth sits in, this basin would be pushed upwards and everything on top of it is pushed against it. If air, ground, objects were directly accelerated they would not fall to the ground when dropped.
This basin would need to be quite deep. People have drilled more than 4 miles deep without finding any bottom.
There are several problems this model brings up:
* We measure different gravities at different areas of the earth at the same elevation. If we are going to allow mass derived gravitational attraction we could envision different densities of the underlying ground to cause this.
* We also measure lower gravity as altitude increases. If we are going to allow mass derived gravitational attraction we could envision that we are not being accelerated upwards at 9.81m/s^2, but at a somewhat lower rate and the difference is made up by the mass of the ground beneath us. As we increase elevation we get farther from this mass so the force decreases. I haven't done the math, but, I'm suspicious this would not calculate out.
* What about the other things that are not being accelerated up? Sun, moon, stars. They must also be accelerated upwards directly or they would fall to the ground. This is difficult to resolve.
* Seismic analysis doesn't line up with a flat plane very well. Since at least the early 1900's people have been analyzing volcanos and earthquakes and measuring seismic waves recorded at different areas of the world. Using the RE locations of the volcano/earthquake and the RE location of the seismic recording stations people analyze the structure of the earth's core. The problems these bring up for a flat plane are significant. Below are a few articles about the RE core analysis. I can't resolve this information with either UA or infinite plane, maybe someone else has some thoughts.
https://www.e-education.psu.edu/earth520/content/l2_p25.htmlhttps://sciencing.com/gutenberg-discontinuity-8747365.htmlhttps://sciencing.com/do-scientists-structure-earths-interior-8695198.htmlhttp://www.columbia.edu/~vjd1/earth_int.htmhttps://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/12/981211083655.htmhttps://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/06/180627160232.htm