Recent content by FactChecker

I don't expect "infinite controls". I would just encourage you to be reasonably careful about your experiment before you expect good answers from a physics forum. Was the water pure, distilled water? What is in the mineral water, and what are all those gas bubbles? Please use distilled water...

Good point. That makes the measurement of weight that others have recommended more important I can't judge the volume of the collapsed bottles.

Some of those photos show a LOT of loss of volume. IMO, that much shrinkage is hard to explain. And it is very pronounced in some bottles, but not others. You should try well-controlled experiments rather than casual observations.

IMO, you are putting words into my mouth. I reasonably thought that we were discussing the SR theory of what is happening now, locally. That is how SR is usually discussed and applied. There is less freedom in the mathematics than people think.

Mathematically, with very reasonable/desirable assumptions, there are only two possibilities, and only one with a constant speed of light. The assumption of relativity will only allow Galilean relativity (all inertial frames share a universal time) or Einsteinian relativity (constant speed of...

"Perfect" is a very strong requirement. The Earth/Moon combination is nearly perfect. The Earth alone will be influenced a tiny bit by the Moon. No. Nothing in physics is there to give it "weird warps". @Filip Larsen 's post #8 should help you in that.

That's an important clarification.

After precise experiments that measured the speed of light as c, no matter what the velocity of the test platform was, I think it was somewhat natural to consider.

If you are talking about average temp or rain fall in a particular location, the tilt of the Earth's axis is much more significant than the shape of the orbit. If you are talking about global surface temperature, you should be aware that there is a great deal of random behavior in that data. I...

I'll accept that. I may read more into the word than I should, and I don't want to further hijack this discussion.

My objection was to the phrase "well established". How do you "establish" an interpretation? Maybe "respected" would be a better word.

Can you be more specific? Are any interpretations like that "established", let alone "well established"? Do you mean popular? (Even that may be too strong.)

Cookies are often necessary to keep track of the progress of each user in navigating a website. Any website that can not use any cookies has very little that it can do except to show one display to everyone.

You are asking if we do impossible things, can impossible things happen. Yes.

I thought that Bell's theorem/test ruled out the existence of local hidden variables.