No, you made certain this was not the case when you specified that the change in velocity would take place over the course of five minutes. I defy you to find a chair it would take you five minutes to fall from.
Did you miss this? I’m talking about 2 separate jumps 5 minutes apart.
When, after meeting the ground, T climbs back onto the chair 5 minutes later, the relative velocity between T0 and T has increased to 250000ms. When T jumps again, T0 will record 1s elapsed time from leaving the chair to meeting the ground and T will record 1.8s.
In other words, you believe that someone who jumped off the chair will never fall to the surface - they will hover.
No, that’s not what I believe but according to numerous statements in the wiki, that is what the FE position is. Or do I misunderstand that the FE position is that an object doesn’t “fall”, but that the earth comes up to meet it? What does that object do during the time it takes for the earth to meet it (in a vacuum)?
The scenario I’ve described is conceptually the same as the bowling ball/feathers video that is in the wiki. A part of the commentary of the video says “At the moment of release the feathers cease being accelerated upwards, are
inert in space”. Synonyms for “inert” are “motionless”, “unmoving”, “stationary” (is this where I am supposed to ask “motionless”, “unmoving”, “stationary”
relative to what”?) I think “hover” would be an applicable synonym as well since it means to be motionless in the air.
So the questions are
1) when you perform the experiment the first time on a flat earth with UA, would a clock on the bowling ball and feathers show them meeting the ground in the same amount of time as a clock that is being accelerated on the ground?
According to time dilation, no. A clock on the feathers/bowling ball is inert (motionless, unmoving, stationary, hovering). A clock that is being accelerated on the ground is moving at some velocity close to c relative to the feathers/bowling ball. A moving clock measures time more slowly than an inert (motionless, unmoving, stationary, hovering) clock, so the accelerated clock will measure a different time.
One also has to wonder why the bowling ball and feathers didn’t disintegrate while smashing into the atmolayer.
2) Second question is if you perform the same experiment a second time, say 5 minutes later, would a clock on the bowling ball and feathers measure the same amount of time to meet the ground as it measured the first time?
Again, the answer is no because during the intervening 5 minutes, the accelerating flat earth has increased its velocity but the clock on the bowling ball and feathers is just as inert (motionless, unmoving, stationary and still hovering) for the second experiment as it was for the first. That means the relative velocity between the earth and the bowling ball and feathers is different for the first and second experiment, so the time it would take them to meet would also change. It should also be noted that the clock on the feathers/bowling ball still wouldn’t match a clock being accelerated on the ground for the second experiment either, and the difference between the clocks would be even greater than the first experiment since the relative velocity has increased.
This, of course, is also incorrect, but you already know that.
Nope, its a basic principle of GR (and the equivalence principle) that free fall is inertial motion, not accelerated motion and therefore no force is involved. An object in free fall is moving along a geodesic, so what we experience as gravity isn’t an effect of a force, but an effect of the curvature of spacetime. I’m surprised you don’t know that.