I was very sad to see this reply, I was so much looking forward to someone commenting on my example.I am not playing games like 'you do this if I do that'.
I have made my case, you choose, sadly it seems, to prevaricate, I have asked to clarify assumptions - specifically - we just seem to speak different languages.
There are no winners. We shall both enjoy our assumptions.
Have fun. Live long and happily.
I'm sorry I annoyed you and that you took my last post in a way not intended by me. I was a little clumsy, I'm not as good with words as you. My intention was to be extra polite giving you an easy option not to reply. Perhaps I should have done what some other people do, i.e restate my case and then shout WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS........ with big bold and coloured underlined letters.
I just wanted one last chance for someone to comment on my example, before I started commenting on your examples. I wasn't playing games, I was just trying to be methodical. I notice that you even have to ask for peoples opinions about your ideas. In post 17, you say "Helio, what is your take on this?" It's nice to have people comment on one's ideas, that's all I wanted.
As for assumptions, I thought I had addressed that with the definition of rotation etc. That did cover differences between day and night and year, spin and orbit. All in post 22. I'm sorry for being too thick see anything else that needed clarifying. What other assumptions did you want clarifying?
I made no extraordinary assumptions in my space station example.
1. You know how an artificial gravity space station works.
2. There are only the usual scientific assumptions in the formula I used. It's a standard formula for centripital force, I didn't make it up.
It was crystal clear, I used plain English with readily available definitions on google etc.