Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: hertz778@gmail.com (rhertz)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.math
Subject: Re: The mystery behind the Einstein-Besso 54 pages manuscript, hiidden for
 40 years.
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2025 15:15:29 +0000
Organization: novaBBS
Message-ID: <0dd60c51d82d574f562f30dfd32794ef@www.novabbs.com>
References: <f3ec305e8d808a1c8c160f3228a767df@www.novabbs.com> <67FF3261.2BED@ix.netcom.com> <vtnekd$3ms5$3@solani.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="611979"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="OjDMvaaXMeeN/7kNOPQl+dWI+zbnIp3mGAHMVhZ2e/A";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$jKnvW1uLSvg7nlTuKlCRxuEBq8sqP01grurPEpNIYVnP4owr3cTgy
X-Rslight-Posting-User: 26080b4f8b9f153eb24ebbc1b47c4c36ee247939
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 6925
Lines: 134

On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 5:19:09 +0000, Physfitfreak wrote:

> On 4/15/25 11:30 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>> it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that Albert Einstein is no
>> Einstein.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> rhertz wrote:
>>>
>>> Chat with DeepSeek:
>>>
>>> QUESTION:
>>>
>>> Tell me about the "54 pages Einstein-Besso manuscript" that Besso HELD
>>> until his death in 1953. When this manuscript emerged, and was subject
>>> to public auction in 1992, it also emerged fierce criticisms from
>>> scholars during such dark period (1954-1990), which showed (with hundred
>>> of references) how WRONG was the approach of the team on the Mercury
>>> problem. It included an error of 3 magnitudes and negative sign in the
>>> final calculation. Now, it's in public domain. Which is your opinion of
>>> such manuscript and why do you believe it was hidden for 40 years by
>>> Besso?
>>>
>>> DEEPSEEK ANSWER:
>>>
>>> The Einstein-Besso manuscript (1913) is one of the most controversial
>>> and revealing documents in the history of general relativity (GR). Its
>>> contents, hidden by Michele Besso until his death in 1953 and later
>>> auctioned in 1992, expose critical errors in Einstein’s early approach
>>> to the Mercury perihelion problem—errors that were orders of magnitude
>>> wrong and even had the wrong sign in calculations.
>>>
>>> ...
>
>
> Star, tell him that's how science works. The way to get there is messy
> and full of mistakes, but some eventually get there! The sugar coating
> comes later for sex reasons :)


Self-entitled imbecile. Do you really need a mediator to communicate
your ignorant comments about how does science works? Who the fuck are
you to pretend to represent the entire scientific community? You're just
a little prick, and a coward one.


Science, in particular "hard" science, which requires knowing a massive
amount of mathematics, plus CRITICAL THINKING and DEEP INSIGHTS, doesn't
reach final or intermediate results by performing "Brownian" actions,
mostly random, to see if some valid result is achieved.

In particular, if a given project starts with TWO COMPLETE IGNORANTS OF
ASTRONOMY like Einstein and Besso.

To realize how IGNORANT and how LOST in the field they were by 1913, YOU
HAVE TO ANALYZE THE MANUSCRIPT (which I did, and you didn't). IN DETAIL.
Then you can estimate how LOST they were when they tried to figure out
the missing arcseconds.

Didn't you ask yourself how come the Mercury's problem was one of the
three predictions done by Einstein around 1911-1912 that he WOULD
EXPLAIN BY USING RELATIVITY?

No, you didn't, because you're a blind imbecile who follow the rules of
your messiah blindly.

When Einstein announced his goal to extend relativity to include
gravity, and later published his 1911 paper, he couldn't have written
anything more stupid when he tried to find holes in the
keplerian-newtonian physics.

In a short period of time, around 1910, he became aware of prior works
on missing parts of celestial mechanics and the impact of the behavior
of light in astronomy, as well as the speed of gravity (instead of the
infamous "action at a distance"). So, he obtained information, through
his network of advisors, of:

- 1801 Von Soldner paper about the deflection of light due to gravity,
which he
  plagiarized in 1911 WITHOUT ANY SHAME.

- 1897 Gerber paper about retarded potentials and the speed of gravity,
which
  explained MATHEMATICALLY the speed of gravity, using Mercury's data
available
  by then (Newcomb, among others), which was USED AS AN ENTRY PARAMETER.
The final
  Gerber's formula was the obsession of Einstein, who tried in vain to
obtain such
  result by using spacetime to replace retarded potentials. He FAILED
MISERABLY
  TRYING THIS, WITH BESSO, in 1913. Read the 54 pages manuscript to
realize HOW
  INCREDIBLY IGNORANT WERE BOTH about celestial mechanics.

The Nov. 1915 paper about Mercury IS NOT a reasonable evolution of what
they
believed and wrote about by 1913. It's a RADICAL DEPARTURE from such
HIDDEN paper,
which was written UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF PROFESSIONAL ASTRONOMERS
(Freundlich and
Schwartzchild).

All the crap written by 1913 was completely DELETED (and proofs were
hidden by Besso), and a radical fresh start was done in 1915, by using
ORIGINAL NEWTONIAN
MATHEMATICS, conveniently modified by a HACKED RESULT of his basic GR
equation (the modification of the gravitational potential in the middle
of the paper).

There are traces in the 1913 manuscript that they were looking for a
pseudo-newtonian equation using polynomials with three and four roots to
describe Mercury's orbit, and approximations to resolve such polynomials
(which had no analytical solution) by decomposing them in: A newtonian
quadratic polynomial MULTIPLIED BY ONE OR TWO ADDITIONAL ROOTS. But the
context that the IGNORANT COUPLE used was to insert influences of every
fucking planet plus the Sun as a liquid, rotating sphere.

Do the work to analyze the historical data, AND USE YOUR FUCKING BRAIN.
You'll realize then, that the 1915 paper (which was a reverse
engineering of Gerber's paper) WAS NOT THE WORK OF EINSTEIN, who didn't
know SHIT about astronomy (as Lorentz said in 1920: "Einstein is not an
astronomer, but....."). Lorentz himself
somehow questioned the work of Einstein, after his peak in fame. And he
told that to a couple of journalists. Fact-check this.


Einstein DID NEVER DO SCIENCE: His entire career of 10 years (1905-1915)
is plagued with fraud, steal, cheating, plagiarism, back-stabbing,
intellectual work sequestering and appropriation, lies, hypocrisy,
cynicism and A HEAVY HELP OF FRIENDS. He's as fake as a three dollars
bill, but he was sustained in fame for political AND RELIGIOUS
interests.