Re: Relativity claims to have proven that parallel lines meet.

On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 17:26:08 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

This is necessary because it claims to have proven the doubling of the
Newtonian deflection, which involves curved space and parallel lines
meeting.

The derivation is fallacious, so it does not predict as follows:
After Newton's particle theory of light was discarded in the 19th
century due to experiments such as the double-slit experiment proving
light to be a wave. Relativity claims to have proven that gravity
affects light even though it would have no mass as a wave. It claims
gravity affects light twice as much as it does everything else. This
after Galileo proved that Aristotle was wrong and everything, no matter
how heavy, is affected the same, and after Eotvos proved that all
materials were affected exactly the same, unlike with magnetism. Carl
Sagan would call this an extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary
proof. Various experiments, including the observations of starlight
during eclipses, have allegedly proved at least two claims.
There is one more, and even more radical, claim involved by relativity
due to the derivation of its prediction. It claims to have calculated a
curving of space itself by gravity equal to the curving of light's path,
according to Newton, making the two add up to twice Newtonian. One
problem with this sufficient to refute it is that it is illogical. An
illogical claim cannot make a scientific prediction. It is illogical
because it involves the reification fallacy. However, suppose we remain
open to this idea. In that case, we find that the claim that the
deflection of light by twice Newtonian has been proven by experiment
necessarily involves claiming to have proven that parallel lines meet
because curved space involves that. In this way, relativity has made
three extraordinary claims allegedly proven at a stroke by these
experiments. In my opinion, the experiments have not and cannot prove
that parallel lines meet. Therefore, they cannot prove that space is
curved. Therefore, they cannot prove light is deflected twice Newtonian.
 That parallel lines could meet is a claim involving the reification
fallacy, so it cannot be true. Space is not a surface, so it cannot
curve. To derive a doubling of the deflection from parallel lines
meeting requires a reification fallacy, making the derivation false
because it is illogical. An illogical prediction cannot predict.