The Sanner Model (TSM) postulates a purely radial, curl-free aether flow toward mass centers, and this paper shows that it necessarily predicts zero frame-dragging. The context is Gravity Probe B (GP-B), which measured a residual precession of gyroscopes in Earth orbit, with a component attributed to frame-dragging (the Lense-Thirring effect) at approximately 0.039 arcseconds per year. In TSM the aether velocity field is v = -sqrt(2GM/r) r-hat, which is irrotational: curl v = 0. It has no azimuthal component and no dependence on the rotation vector J of the central mass. Consequently, the spin evolution equation contains no term proportional to J, and the model predicts omega_frame-dragging = 0 exactly. The larger GP-B precession of 6.6 arcsec/yr is derived instead from the radial aether gradient combined with kinematic Thomas precession, giving omega = (3GM/2c^2R) Omega, which reproduces the measured value without curved spacetime. The reported 0.039 arcsec/yr residual is reinterpreted not as a physical dragging of space or aether, but as a systematic data-reduction artifact arising from the use of GR-based ephemerides and clock models that presuppose frame-dragging. A timing error of approximately 0.3 nanoseconds over the 1.5-year mission, corresponding to a fractional clock-rate error of about 6 x 10^-18, is sufficient to produce the entire observed signal. A detailed re-reduction protocol is proposed, using the Sanner clock equation gamma = 1/sqrt(1 - v_net^2/c^2), with v_net^2 = v_aether^2 + v_motion^2, and Newtonian orbital mechanics, so that no frame-dragging term is assumed in the ephemerides. The paper concludes with two falsifiable challenges: re-analyze the GP-B raw data without GR-based frame-dragging assumptions, and apply the same null-prediction logic to other frame-dragging tests such as LAGEOS and lunar laser ranging. If TSM is correct, the reported residual will vanish within error bars.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gunnar Sanner (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: