Because it works well in terms of what was tested of it. A lot of it connects quite well to the equivalence principle

GR's gravity has no actual proof

As a mathematical model it can predict things that align with the *globe* model

But when it comes to FE it doesn't

And the math behind GR leads to contradictions within itself

97 eleven

You sure ur fe?

As sure as I am that GR is utter nonsense

smart people are starting to realize whats going on

It sorta can, like Universal Acceleration, and what that all implies

UA is wrong

If you believe in the FES nonsense then you're completely wrong

Even globe earthers can debunk UA

Equivalence principle demonstrates it as an adequate model of local gravity

Define the equivalence principle

What's the source of the acceleration

UA is made by a controlled opposition group

The effects of our observed local gravitational field cannot be experimentally distinguished from an accelerated frame of reference.

Thats off google fyi ^

Pretty much

Word for word

Lmao

So you have no clue what you are talking about

Tell me this

Why did we first determine the equivalence principle

Not word for word

What mathematical relation led to it

You tell me

🤔

I asked the question

He will google it

I'll wait

Nothing wrong with that, but I won't.
You tell me, I admit I don't know the answer to that

Since I assume you are making a point

Then dont get into an argument you cant win

It arises due to the fact that gravational mass is exactly equal to inertial mads

Mass*

Which is why i decided not to continue

97 why dont u explain something simple to them like boats going over the curve

I don't care about winning arguments

I'm just demonstrating your ignorance