Re: Newton: Photon falling from h meters increase its energy.

Den 18.01.2025 21:00, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen:

On Sat, 18 Jan 2025 13:15:41 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
 

Den 17.01.2025 22:17, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen:
>
The equation for the total deflection is:
   Θₜ = 4GM/Δ⋅c²
where:
  Δ = the impact parameter, closest approach to Sun
  c = speed of light in vacuum
  G = gravitational constant
  M = solar mass
     
The equation for the deflection observed from the Earth is:
  Θ = (2GM/Δ⋅c²)⋅(1 + cosφ)
where:
 φ  = angle Star-Sun as observed from the Earth
>
This equation is derived from the equation for total deflection
with a bit of geometry.
>
These equations are thoroughly confirmed to be correct because
experiments have shown that their predictions are correct within
the precision of the measurements, which are in the order of ±0.005%.
>
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
>

You must be extremely ignorant to think an experiment can prove a false
derivation.

>
The experiments say nothing about the correctness
of any derivations, they only show that the equations
Θₜ = 4GM/Δ⋅c² and Θ = (2GM/Δ⋅c²)⋅(1 + cosφ)  are correct.
>
Since Poor claims that the equation Θₜ = 4GM/Δ⋅c² is wrong,
Poor is proven wrong.
>
Do you really believe that the derivation was wrong but
the result of the derivation was right?
Possible, but not probable.

The "4" in the equation comes from non-Euclidean geometry, "curved
space." This derivation is incorrect because space is not a surface, so
it does not curve. You keep deflecting from the derivation to the
experiments. All I've been talking about is the derivation. Didn't you
listen? If the experiments obtained correct results, that does not make
the derivation correct. Don't be stupid. It doesn't make space curved.
That is an elementary logical fallacy.

I deduce from your statement:
   "If the experiments obtained correct results,
    that does not make the derivation correct."
that you accept the fact that it is experimentally confirmed
that the equation Θₜ = 4GM/Δ⋅c² is correct.
Do you really believe that the derivation from GR is wrong,
but the result of the wrong derivation is correct? :-D
Nobody, not even you, can be that stupid.
The fact that Einstein and a number of other physicists have
calculated that GR predicts the experimentally verified equation
Θₜ = 4GM/Δ⋅c² for the gravitational bending of light, prove that
the derivation is correct.
And since Poor claimed that the equation Θₜ = 4GM/Δ⋅c²
was wrong, Poor is proven wrong.
Or does your logic say otherwise?
--
Paul
https://paulba.no/