Re: The Schwarzschild Metric has been refuted.

On 2025-04-28 18:27:54 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 9:29:52 +0000, Mikko wrote:
 

On 2025-04-25 16:10:42 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:
 

This metric doubles the Newtonian deflection, so the relativity
derivation is invalid.
 "Using the Newton’s Theory of Gravity to Calculate the
Deflection of Light in the Solar System and the Orbital
Poles of Light’s Motion of General Relativity"
Mei Xiaochun

 Actual measurements of the deflection support General Relativity.
So do the measurements of light travel times. Newtonian gravity
does not say anything about light. With the additional hypthesis
that light is a stream of particles with small but non-zero mass,
which hypothesis is compatible with Newtonian optics, the deflection
can be computed. The result is refuted by observations but Newtonian
gravity without the additional hypthesis is not refuted.

Experimental results cannot provide evidence for a fallacious derivation
because that derivation can not predict.

That's right. Only a mathematical derivation can, and only if done correctly.

You have forgotten that Galileo proved all masses are affected the same
by gravity.

Irrelevant. The important point is that GR says the same (as long as the
masses are small enough that they don't affect the sources of gravity).

I take it you mean that adding curved space to Newtonian is not refuted.

That does not make sense. A Galilean space, where the spatial gemotry
is Euclidean, is an essential part of Newton's theory. If a curved
space is allowed then all consequences of Galilean geometry must be
reconsidered, which Newton didn't do.

It has not been proven because it hasn't been predicted when the
derivation is faulty.

You haven't presented any derivation, faulty or otherwise.
--
Mikko