Isn't that exactly what I am saying? You just seemed to me to be fixed on the view that any reference frame that shows time slowing to a standstill must be excluded from consideration. It is the exclusion that I find hard to accept. This is the critical point because once you accept that it is equally valid, then you will see that what I say is correct for a distant observer (Barring minor corrections for our rotating frame of reference).
Dave Proffitt