Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.quux.org!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Newton: Photon falling from h meters increase its energy.
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2025 04:49:41 +0000
Organization: novaBBS
Message-ID: <4568ec448c26221aea0c57a6bfc7b29b@www.novabbs.com>
References: <4af374770bb67b6951ef19c75b35fbad@www.novabbs.com> <1819b35cb5854fb7$83258$1308629$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com> <17a125a3e75f42ff91ef08afdab4e0a9@www.novabbs.com> <1819b79e1aa58c97$89507$1329657$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> <9e55d347a16ad439d5b2e75440ae1a6d@www.novabbs.com> <6782d853$0$28064$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <c2fdc44dd6b77812b78bd871c9bde8f3@www.novabbs.com> <4404fd8d88a2eacd658d92efeef4d6c2@www.novabbs.com> <vm3ncs$20493$1@dont-email.me> <7db98cab57f6050f8daf2f88b9bfdcdb@www.novabbs.com> <vm6lel$2jd9o$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3664377"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="HcQFdl4zp4UQRQ9N18ivMn6Fl9V8n4SPkK4oZHLgYdQ";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Rslight-Posting-User: a2f761a7401f13abeefca3440f16b2f27b708180
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$rcEMTGDmwG8X1mpoS5vmn.95upA4CpFYrldCEwJ785J2XlxZoTOzq

On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:39:43 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:

> Den 14.01.2025 01:36, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen:
>> On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 18:54:29 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
>>
>>> GR's prediction for the gravitational deflection of EM-radiation
>>> is so thoroughly experimentally confirmed that you have to be
>>> extremely ignorant not to accept it.
>>>
>
>> "This is exactly double the value given in 1911, and this doubling
>> of values has given rise to many speculations, and to many and
>> varied explanations, on the part of the relativists.
>
> Everybody knows that his 1911 prediction is wrong.
> It is in fact the Newtonian prediction.
> So what?
>
> It is a fact that experiments have shown that GR correctly
> predicts how light is gravitational deflected.
>
>
>> An inspection of the formulas, which Einstein used, shows
>> exactly what he did and how he derived this result. The essential
>> factor in the formula is that for the rate of change of velocity
>> along the wave-front 6c, 6x ; and this is the only factor in which
>> any change can be made. All the other terms and factors of the
>> formula are always identically the same." - Poor = "THE RELATIVITY
>> DEFLECTION OF LIGHT!"
>
> Why don't you understand that it is hopeless to claim that
> the GR equation  Θ = 4GM/Δ⋅c² is wrong?
>
> During the 100+ years since Einstein wrote the GR paper,
> the calculation is repeated _many_ times by different physicists.
>
> It is a _fact_ that GR predicts that the gravitational deflection
> of light is  Θ = 4GM/Δ⋅c².
>
> See:
>
>
> 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
>
> GR's prediction for the gravitational deflection of EM-radiation
> is so thoroughly experimentally confirmed that you have to be
> extremely ignorant not to accept it.
You are such a waste of time as you never directly answer any of the
points made. Relativity does not predict how much light is deflected, so
experiments cannot prove relativity. It provides no good reason for the
doubling because it resorts to the reification fallacy of non-Euclidean
geometry. Space is not curved because it is an abstraction. "Many
physicists" is yet another appeal to authority, which is another logical
fallacy you are so stupid as to defend. It is extraordinary that so many
eminent scientists accept so many foolish and ignorant ideas, including
the velocity-distance relationship and the doubling.