Den 25.10.2024 20:41, skrev rhertz:
Every one of the theoretical and experimental tests about the
predictions of general relativity have been widely questioned in the
last 100 years.
1. THEORETICAL EXPLANATION OF THE "EXTRA" ADVANCE OF MERCURY'S
PERIHELION.
Since Le Verrier´s calculation (1854) of the "missing" 43"/century in
the advance of Mercury's perihelion until these days, a common MISTAKE
persists. Actually, the original discrepancy was of 37" (Le Verrier),
corrected in 1898 to 43" by the US astronomer Newcomb.
https://paulba.no/pdf/GRPerihelionAdvance.pdfhttps://paulba.no/pdf/GRPerihelionAdvance.pdf In ALL THESE CASES, and even today, the total calculation is based on
the influence of every planet on the precession of Mercury BY USING
GAUSS´S MODEL OF TORUS OF GRAVITATIONAL INFLUENCE by each planet on
Mercury.
KEEP THIS IN MIND: To calculate the gravitational influence of every
planet (and other celestial bodies) over Mercury for the lapse of 100
years IS IMPOSSIBLE EVEN TODAY, with help of supercomputers. This would
require hundred of millions of calculations to be performed, slicing the
100 years in FRACTIONS of the orbital period of the fastest planet
(Mercury) and APPLIED TO THE SEGMENTED ORBIT OF THE REST OF THE PLANETS.
You don't need a supercomputer to make hundreds of millions of
calculations.
I have simulated the solar system for 10 thousand years,
and simulated the perihelion advance for all the planets.
It's done in 15 hours on my computer.
Hundreds of millions calculations is a GROSS underestimation!
https://paulba.no/Application.htmlhttps://paulba.no/SolarSystem/GRSolarSystem.jarhttps://paulba.no/SolarSystem/GRSolarSystem.pdfhttps://paulba.no/SolarSystem/MercuryAdvance.pdf At every step, a calculation of the perturbations of one planet over
each other HAS TO BE COMPUTED. Then, step by step, such result HAS TO BE
APPLIED as the input of the next step in parametric calculations. No
analytical expression can be written to contemplate this N-Body problem,
and the only way is to compute each influence step by step in a
supercomputer, which lead to almost infinite calculations for the 100
years period.
Quite.
https://paulba.no/SolarSystem/GRSolarSystem.pdfSee equations (11) to (20)
This calculation is done every 5. second true time.
That's 61.5 billion times to simulate 10 thousand years.
And this is not the calculation that costs most calculations.
To determine the point of perihelion, the distance planet-sun
has to be compared to the previous distance to find the minimum.
This has to be done for _all_ the planets.
My computer can make 150 billion flops/second.
So in 15 hours it can make 8100 terra flops.
You have to update you knowledge of what a modern computer,
which is NOT a supercomputer, can do!
The use of Gauss' gravity torus IS A VERY GROSS CALCULATION: It consists
in replacing the hundred of millions of calculations per planet
(ignoring influence of the other planets) by a gravitational torus,
which is based in the replacement of orbits by A SINGLE TORUS, which
contemplate the gravitational influence as a replacement of punctual
orbital positions by a single torus along the orbit. It's about
replacing the Newton law of gravity (applied at each position of a
planet) by a SOLID TORUS with the equivalence of mass of the planet
SPREAD ALL OVER the orbit of it.
But it works quite well.
2. EXPERIMENTAL VERIFICATION OF DEFLECTION OF STARLIGHT (Eddington, etc)
The 1919 expedition by the British was HIGHLY BIASED due to Eddington
and the team of calculists, who discarded VITAL DATA that proved that
the verification WAS FALSE, and had political influences just after WWI.
This long article, supported by the Royal Astronomical Society explain a
100 years of controversy in detail. There are hundred of other papers,
but I selected this as the most relevant.
The 1919 eclipse results that verified general relativity and their
later detractors: a story re-told
Gerard Gilmore and Gudrun Tausch-Pebody
Published:21 October 2021https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2020.0040
The eclipse measurements are notoriously imprecise,
and are of historic interest only.
The gravitationally deflection of EM-radiation is now
so thoroughly well known that there is no point in discussing it.
It's settled.
The gravitational deflection of EM-radiation is as predicted by GR.
https://paulba.no/pdf/GravitationalDeflection.pdfExperimental evidence:
https://paulba.no/paper/PPN_gamma_Hipparcos.pdfhttps://paulba.no/paper/PPN_gamma_Cassini.pdfhttps://paulba.no/paper/Shapiro_2004.pdfhttps://paulba.no/paper/Fomalont.pdfhttps://paulba.no/paper/PPN_gamma_Cassini_2.pdfNow is when you make a fool of yourself, claiming:
" About your list of historical proofs of relativity,
I can make a deep forensic analysis of them, proving beyond
any reasonable doubt, that relativists are members of a MAFFIA,
and profit from it. This is because the different results are
COOKED with the help of statistical manipulations, fraud,
cooking and peer complicity. "
A simulation:
https://paulba.no/Deflection.html-----------------------
BTW, do you remember this? :-D
| Den 10.09.2024 03:19, skrev rhertz:
|>
|> Paul Andersen posted, without a bit of shame, the following:
|>>
|>> GR predicts that the gravitational deflection of em-radiation
|>> by the Sun, observed from the Earth, is:
|>>
|>> θ = 2GM/(AU⋅c²)⋅(1+cosφ)/sinφ
|>>
|>> Where:
|>> AU= an astronomical unit (distance Sun-Earth)
|>> φ = angle Sun-Earth as observed from the Earth
|>> c = speed of light in vacuum
|>> G = Gravitational constant
|>> M = solar mass
|>>
|>
|> Your formula, that you wrote with sheer cockiness claiming that it's
|> what GR predicts (false), contain an incredible amount of nonsense.
|>
|> Your pretentious formula couldn't be more wrong for the following:
|>
|> 1) You are dismissing completely the effect of swapping the Sun's
|> reference frame with that of the Earth.
|>
|> 2) You are dismissing completely the FACT that Earth is a sphere, and
|> thatthe observation of an eclipse at any given location depend on the
|> position of the observer (latitude, longitude). Also, you FORGOT that
|> the position of the Sun relative to Earth's coordinates DEPEND on the
|> time of the year, as well the exact hour of the phenomenon. Earth
|> rotates around the Sun, with reference to the ecliptic plane, with an
|> anual variation of ± 11.5 degrees!!!
|>
|> 3) Also, the position of the Sun with reference to the LOCAL
|> equatorial coordinate DEPENDS on the time of the day!! Because
|> the Earth rotates daily.
|>
|> 4) You FORGOT that the path of incoming light DEPENDS ON the
|> ELEVATION of the Sun over the horizon. This causes that the light
|> of the Sun (and stars behind it) SUFFER A CONSIDERABLE NUMBER OF
|> PERTURBATIONS. One ofthe most important is the REFRACTION of the
|> light passing through atmosphere, being minimal at noon. Even so,
|> elevation angle at noon
|> CHANGES PERMANENTLY, while the Earth travels around the Sun. The
|> elevation is MINIMAL in winter and MAXIMAL in summer. Only in the
|> locations over the equatorial line, you can obtain 90 degrees of
|> elevation in summer time.
|>
|> 5) You dismiss completely the fact that the position of the Sun, in
|> the moment of any eclipse, is almost arbitrary, and very far from
|> being at90 degrees respect to the Sun.
|>
|> ARE YOU CRAZY? I ASK THIS VERY SERIOUSLY.
|>
Still laughing! :-D
-- Paulhttps://paulba.no/
Weakness in the results of the three tests of GR shown in rhe lasr century,.
Re: Weakness in the results of the three tests of GR shown in rhe lasr century,.