From: mlfasf@comcast.net   
      
   > On 4/18/22 9:46 AM, Tom Roberts wrote:   
   >> Your argument is invalid because   
   >> the physical situations aren't actually equivalent -- the region   
   >> involved is too large for the Principle of Equivalence to apply   
   >   
      
   Mike Fontenot replied (on 4/18/22 3:17 PM):   
      
   The equivalence principle has no restrictions on the size of the region   
   in which it is valid.   
      
      
   > [[Mod. note -- The EP applies if and only if we neglect tidal effects,   
   > i.e., if tidal effects are "small".  But the size of tidal effects grows   
   > with the distance, so saying that tidal effects should be "small" (so   
   > that we can apply the EP) is essentially saying that the size of our   
   > region should be "small".  So, effectively, the EP only applies in "small"   
   > regions, where the precise definition of "small" depends on the curvature   
   > of spacetime and your accuracy threshold for how small tidal effects need   
   > to be before it's ok to neglect them.   
      
   There are NO "tidal effects" in my gravitational scenario (nor in my   
   equivalent special relativity scenario, of course).   
      
   Tidal effects arise when the gravitational field lines are NOT parallel,   
   which occurs when the source of the gravitational field is a spherical   
   distribution of mass, which acts as if all of the mass is concentrated   
   at a point at the center of the sphere, giving an inverse-square   
   variation of "g" with height).   
      
   In my gravitational scenario, the gravitational lines are all EXACTLY   
   PARALLEL, and perpendicular to the FLAT surface (of infinite extent) of   
   the mass that the high-rise building is sitting on.  That's why the   
   field strength "g" in my scenario is (by design) independent of height   
   ... it does NOT vary as the inverse-square of height.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)