Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: hertz778@gmail.com (rhertz)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Steel Man of Einstein & Relativity.
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2024 01:19:43 +0000
Organization: novaBBS
Message-ID: <9ba099f1aecf32f46444cc68d1aaf541@www.novabbs.com>
References: <23387e561af5e3d769b94ab9ddc5f74b@www.novabbs.com> <7dfa7214e108991221d9b7115961ca87@www.novabbs.com> <00a9cb00ad7df66a0aaeefeac11278a7@www.novabbs.com> <-hc8RY2DvPYBVYYkPGqCAQ_LJH8@jntp> <vbnhuq$2h766$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="1483129"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="hWiuCAeR3KEZYJfTvV11n0qrRi6oqW/zjvEZQQGun9A";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$PqMOYTlIPw2ynlkvC77EROjkNv2LFufr/MvbtcPw7xVcVLi/Fdaou
X-Rslight-Posting-User: f685b96694175b2ad43ead343ead0a9c0082fe88
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 6187
Lines: 124

Paul Andersen posted, without a bit of shame, the following:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
GR predicts that the gravitational deflection of em-radiation
by the Sun, observed from the Earth, is:


    θ = 2GM/(AU⋅c²)⋅(1+cosφ)/sinφ


Where:
  AU= an astronomical unit (distance Sun-Earth)
  φ = angle Sun-Earth as observed from the Earth
  c = speed of light in vacuum
  G = Gravitational constant
  M = solar mass


This equation predicts that when φ is 90⁰, θ = 0.0041".
The beam that hits the Earth will then be 1 AU from
the Sun at it's closest approach to the Sun.
(Like the Earth) Not much gas there, do you think?


These predictions of GR are thoroughly experimentally confirmed:
(even for angles Earth-Sun > 90⁰)


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/GravDeflection.pdf
https://paulba.no/paper/Fomalont.pdf
https://paulba.no/paper/PPN_gamma_Cassini_2.pdf


You must understand that GR's predictions for gravitational
deflection of em-radiation are so thoroughly confirmed that
there is no room for doubt.
---------------------------------------------------

I try very hard not to mock you about the stupidity that you wrote.
Better, I guide you to these
links, where you MIGHT REALIZE the sheer imbecility that you posted:

******************************************
Title: The deflection of light by the gravitational field of the Sun
(George Darwin Lecture)
Authors: Mikhailov, A. A.
Journal: Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. 119,
p.593

https://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/full/seri/MNRAS/0119//0000608.000.html

****************************************
Gravitational Deflection of Particles of Light by the Earth and by the
Sun: A Reconstruction of the Calculations Done by Soldner in 1801

Frans F. van Kampen
The Hague, The Netherlands.
https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=116137
***************************************

Aleksandr Aleksandrovich Mikhailov (April 26, 1888, Morshansk -
September 29, 1983) was a Russian astronomer who was a member of the
Soviet Academy of Science, and supported GR. He, personally,
participated in more than 9 expeditions trying to remake Eddington's
one. The article is FULL OF
MATHEMATICS and statistics, trying to find averages in the results of
expeditions from 1919 to 1952.

In the very first page, it's shown the real expression of your formula,
which seems to be written by an ignorant lunatic, totally detached from
the opinions of REAL ASTRONOMERS, not EE like you!


----------------------------------------------------

Your formula, that you wrote with sheer cockiness claiming that it's
what GR predicts (false), contain an incredible amount of nonsense. Read
the  Mikhailov´s paper, if you want to write meaningful statements

Your pretentious formula couldn't be more wrong for the following:

1) You are dismissing completely the effect of swapping the Sun's
reference frame with that of the Earth.

2) You are dismissing completely the FACT that Earth is a sphere, and
that the observation of an eclipse at any given location depend on the
position of the observer (latitude, longitude). Also, you FORGOT that
the position of the Sun relative to Earth's coordinates DEPEND on the
time of the year, as well the exact hour of the phenomenon. Earth
rotates around the Sun, with reference to the ecliptic plane, with an
anual variation of +/- 11.5 degrees!!!

3) Also, the position of the Sun with reference to the LOCAL equatorial
coordinate DEPENDS on the time of the day!! Because the Earth rotates
daily.

4) You FORGOT that the path of incoming light DEPENDS ON the ELEVATION
of the Sun over the horizon. This causes that the light of the Sun (and
stars behind it) SUFFER A CONSIDERABLE NUMBER OF PERTURBATIONS. One of
the most important is the REFRACTION of the light passing through
atmosphere, being minimal at noon. Even so, the elevation angle at noon
CHANGES PERMANENTLY, while the Earth travels around the Sun. The
elevation is MINIMAL in winter and MAXIMAL in summer. Only in the
locations over the equatorial line, you can obtain 90 degrees of
elevation in summer time.

5) You dismiss completely the fact that the position of the Sun, in the
moment of any eclipse, is almost arbitrary, and very far from being at
90 degrees respect to the Sun.

ARE YOU CRAZY? I ASK THIS VERY SERIOUSLY.

If you want to know HOW DIFFICULT the mathematics involved for starlight
deflection grazing the Sun, read CAREFULLY Mikhailov´s paper, fully
endorsed by the Royal Astronomical Society, where he lectured in 1951.


Finally, I BEG YOU to stop with the crap of PPN, which is an aberrant
linearization of GR, and is ignored by serious astronomers, NASA, ESA,
ROSCOSMOS, China, etc.

Grow up or give up with your unsubstantiated credos, only celebrated by
a bunch of post-Cassini retarded.