🚀 go-pugleaf

$$                   Hexenmeister wrote:
> "Jerry" <Cephalobus_alienus@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:1146315207.177362.140270@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> | Hexenmeister wrote:
> | > "Jerry" <Cephalobus_alienus@comcast.net> wrote in message
> | > news:1146282555.988614.288300@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
> |
> | > | You wrote, "Mercury's precession of longitude of
> | > | perihelion is quite small but entirely Newtonian."
> | >
> | > That doesn't mean I put a figure of 38 arc seconds a
> | > century on it, I'm not that old.
> |
> | You don't even seem to get the distinction between "orbital
> | precession" and "anomalous orbital precession".
>
> Why don't you quit your moaning and start calculating?
> I doubt you've ever seen Mercury, and if you had wouldn't
> recognise it as such. Where and when would you look for it?
>
> | There are three components to what we MEASURE as Mercury's
> | orbital precession of 5600"/century:
>
> Round figures:
> century: 100 years or 36525 days.
> Period of Mercury: 88 days.
> 36525/88 = 415 orbits
> 1 orbit = 360 degrees = 1,296,000 arc seconds.
> 415 orbits = 537,840,000 arc seconds.
> An ANOMOLY of 38 arc seconds is 100 * 38/537,840,000
> = 0.000007%, and you have the arrogance and stupidity
> to claim that to be inexplicable, or as you put it,
> "unexplainable".
>  Einstein had no electronic calculator, and I wouldn't
> trust a MEASUREMENT to anything like that accuracy anyway.
> You are a complete and total idiot, even Danby's old BASIC
> is 16 bit precision, 32 bit when doubled and makes that much
> error in one sin(x) calculation. You think you can do it
> sweating over 7-figure logarithm tables or a slide rule?
> Sheesh, I said use a spreadsheet with 64 bit precision.
> Do it or fuck off.
>
> | 1) Our coordinate system is rotating. Precession of the
> | equinoxes results in a shift in the zero point against which
> | we measure the axis of the orbit of Mercury. Hence,
> | 5025"/century is an artifact of our measurement system.
> | 2) Relative to the "fixed stars", Le Verrier, Newcomb, and
> | many other researchers, as well as students taking celestial
> | mechanics courses, etc. have ascertained that Newtonian
> | mechanics predicts that Mercury's orbit should precess by
> | 532"/century, which when added to 5025"/century, yields
> | 5557"/century.
> | 3) All sorts of hypotheses were advanced to explain the
> | discrepancy between the Newtonian prediction and observed
> | fact. Le Verrier hypothesized the existence of a small
> | planet, or planets, orbiting close to the Sun. Newcomb
> | considered, then discarded, the notion of a ring of matter
> | around the Sun. Another hypothesis that was seriously
> | considered, was the possibility that gravity did not follow
> | a precise inverse-square law.
> | 4) Androcles/Hexenmeister proposes the simplest explanation
> | to be that nobody in the last 160 years has done the NM
> | calculation correctly. Done correctly, Androcles/Hexenmeister
> | suggests that NM should yield a figure of 5600"/century.
> | Androcles/Hexenmeister asserts this with no references nor
> | any calculations, but with only his distinguished reputation
> | to back up his statements.
>
> You are a fucking idiot, babbling about things you have no
> understanding of.  You seem to think astronomers have had
> perfect telescopes for the last 200 years and spend all their
> time studying the position of Mercury, pouring over log and
> sine table tables with teams of human "computers" like Bob
> Cratchit in Dickens' "A Christmas Carol", turning out reams
> of paper.
> "Oh look, we have an anomoly of 0.000007%, let's start over
> and check our work again."
> I don't know what planet you're from but on my planet we allow
> for small errors in measurement and calculation as a fact of
> life.
>
> "38 arc seconds a century is unexplainable" -- Jeery
> What IS inexplicable is how stupid you are.
> Androcles.
Re: How Can Light NOT be Ballistic?

$$   The ORBiTAL DRAG PARADOX & anomalous-kinematic-viscosity.
$$ Every time a solar flare or some other type of Solar AMBiENT
$$ *anomalous-kinematic-viscosity* increases the DENSiTY of the
$$ Solar *electromagnetic-density-GRADiENT, planet MERCURY will
$$ experience an iNCREASE in ORBiTAL DRAG and ORBiTAL VELOCiTY.
$$ [This phenomenom is known CLASSiCALLY has the DRAG PARADOX].
$$ [Of course,*BOTH* Newton & GR believed AMBiENT-space EMPTY].
$$ [This EFFECT of ORBiTAL DRAG moves MERCURY to HiGHER orbit].
$$ [SOLAR FLAREs also have the property of predictable period].
$$ [PREDiCTABLE solar CYCLEs provide the predicable "anomaly"].
$$
$$ [The 11 year PERiODiC Solar iNCREASE in ACTiViTY causes it].

Re: The orbital drag paradox and anomalous-kinematic-viscosity.
Re: Go-go NETSCAPE news < alt.sci.nanotech >.    ..End of POST.