Re: The Schwarzschild Metric has been refuted.

On Sat, 26 Apr 2025 18:35:26 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:

Den 25.04.2025 20:55, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen:

SCIREA Journal of Physics
ISSN: 2706-8862
http://www.scirea.org/journal/Physics
March 24, 2022
Volume 7, Issue 1, February 2022
https://doi.org/10.54647/physics14417
"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"

>
https://article.scirea.org/pdf/14417.pdf
>
I quote from the Introduction:
"The calculations of general relativity assumed that the light
  passes across the solar surface, which was equivalent to assume
  that the solar radius was a root of the cubic equation. It is
  proved in this paper that the solar radius can not be the orbital
  poles of light. The orbital poles of light were located in the solar
  interior not far from the solar center, so the light from stars in
  outer space would be lost in the solar interior and could not be
  observed by the observers on the earth. The night sky on the earth
  would be starless."
>
  Mei Xiaochun actually claims that according to GR, the light from
  all the stars in outer space should be sucked into the Sun so
  no stars would be visible from the Earth!
>
Laurence Clark Crossen, how did you manage to fail to see
that Mei Xiaochun's paper is meaningless drivel?
>
Well done! :-D
>
>
https://paulba.no/pdf/GravitationalDeflection.pdf
https://paulba.no/Deflection.html
https://paulba.no/paper/PPN_gamma_Hipparcos.pdf
https://paulba.no/paper/PPN_gamma_Cassini.pdf
https://paulba.no/paper/Shapiro_2004.pdf
https://paulba.no/paper/Fomalont.pdf
https://paulba.no/paper/PPN_gamma_Cassini_2.pdf

As usual, you misconstrue willfully and stupidly.
That is why your take on it is meaningless drivel.
He has clearly stated that the GR assumptions in the Schwarzschild
metric involve starlight passing through the center of the Sun.
You have not disproved his case for that.
It won't suffice for you to thumb your nose at criticisms of relativity.
Are you a Sinophobe?
Your reply sucks.
You are incompetent at defending relativity as usual.