Motor Daddy:
James, you're deluded if you think for one second your theory is representative of reality.
You still don't get it. Experiment after experiment
proves that "my" theory is representative of reality. Or, to be more accurate, it proves that my (Einstein's) theory is a far better approximation to reality than your (Galileo/Newton's) "absolute spacetime" theory.
You don't know the speed of the object, you don't know if you are faster or slower than another object, you don't know which direction of travel you are traveling, you don't know if when you accelerate you are increasing or decreasing velocity, your pendulum swings and the distance between you and the other vehicle remains the same, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.....
In a sense, you're right, because most of the things you mention are in no way absolute. Different observers in different reference frames measure different values. But (and this is a very important "but"), relativity tells us
precisely, given any one observer's measurements, what
every other observer will measure. That, in fact, is what the theory of relativity is all about. It tells us how things will look when we change reference frames.
I'm accutely aware that you don't
like the idea of no absolutes of space and time and length and force and energy and so on. But, as I and so many others have told you, Nature doesn't care what you like or what you approve or disapprove of. Nature does what it does, regardless of how nice your pet theory may look on paper. And when we look at nature, it does what Einstein says it should do and not what Motor Daddy physics says it should do -
every single time.
You never reply to this fundamental fact, because you have no reply to give other than to refute reality and fall back into your fantasy, theoretical world. That's where every conversation with you ends. It ends with you retreating from reality.
