I really cannot follow what you are saying at all.

Thanks for your time. You made me to feel like my thinking and my question are off the wall, but have discovered my question is very valid. It's probably my ability to express it that's lacking. I think I found the help I was looking for elsewhere, or at least pointing me in the right direction. Even so, I am grateful for whatever time you gave me.

This is what I found ...

"Want to know something that’s kind of messed up? If that was the only thing that was different from Newtonian gravity, Einstein’s theory would be wrong. The predictions that we’d get for planetary orbits, based on where objects like the Sun and the other planets** were 8+ minutes ago [my question exactly] **(or whatever the light-travel time for the planet in question was) are different enough from even observations a century ago that General Relativity would have been determined to be false right away. This effect on its own demanded that, if Newton’s theory was right, the speed of gravity be at least 20 billion times faster than the speed of light!

**But there is another piece to the puzzle.**

The Earth, since it’s also moving, kind of “rides” over the ripples traveling through space, so that it comes down in a different spot from where it was lifted up. It looks like we have two effects going on: each object’s velocity affects how it experiences gravity, and so do the changes that occur in gravitational fields.

What’s amazing is that the changes in the gravitational field felt by a finite speed of gravity and the effects of velocity-dependent interactions cancel almost exactly! The inexactness of the cancellation is what allows us to determine, observationally, if Newton’s “infinite speed of gravity” model or Einstein’s “speed of gravity = speed of light” model matches with our Universe."

**Edited by RodneyBelieves, 19 June 2019 - 11:52 AM.**