🚀 go-pugleaf

On Mar 24, 2:26 am, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote in
sci.physics.relativity:
> On Mar 23, 4:18 pm, hw@..(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 23:33:51 -0000, "Androcles" <Headmas...@Hogwarts.physics>
> > wrote:
>
> > >"Dr. Henri Wilson" <hw@..> wrote in message
> > >news:ck3gs49ng1oq1ibl146j29is59vsqd1a9h@4ax.com...
> > >>I don't believe any of the experiments claiming measurement the bending of
> > >> light by the sun has been at all accurate. The reason I say this is that
> > >> the
> > >> movement of a star's image as it is seen to approach the sun's edge
> > >> progressively slows, stops then reverses, making it impossible to tell how
> > >> close the light rays are passing by the actual edge..and that is a crucial
> > >> factor. Eddington's experiment was just a publicity stunt and a farce.
>
> > >> Gravitational bending of light and lensing are a natural consequence of
> > >> Newtonian theory. Light is accelerated by gravity just like anything else.
> > >> It
> > >> is also slowed by interaction with the solar wind and the sun's
> > >> atmosphere.
>
> > >Most of it is the Coriolis effect.
> > >It take 8 minutes for light to travel from the Sun to Earth.
> > >In that time Earth travels 8 * 360/(1year * 365 days * 24 hours * 60
> > >minutes) =
> > >  0.0055 degrees or 0.33 arc minutes or 20 arc seconds from a straight
> > >line connecting the Earth, Sun and a distant star. Eddington was a dork.
> > > http://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/(Gh)/guides/mtr/fw/gifs/coriolis.mov
>
> > Yes, the whole past procedure appears to be flawed. But Eddington and Einstein
> > knew there were thousands of little eric geeses around who would lap up
> > anything that resembled science fiction.
>
> Then look at the more recent observations. You do know there have been
> recent observations...right?

Earlier observations were fraud but recent are not....right? That is,
it was fraud that converted Albert the Plagiarist into Divine Albert
whereas recent observations just confirmed the Divinity....right?

http://www.cieletespace.fr/evenement/relativit-les-preuves-taient-fausses
RELATIVITE: LES PREUVES ETAIENT FAUSSES
"Le monde entier a cru pendant plus de cinquante ans à une théorie non
vérifiée. Car, nous le savons aujourdhui, les premières preuves,
issues notamment dune célèbre éclipse de 1919, nen étaient pas. Elles
reposaient en partie sur des manipulations peu avouables visant à
obtenir un résultat connu à lavance, et sur des mesures entachées
dincertitudes, quand il ne sagissait pas de fraudes caractérisées."

http://www.cieletespaceradio.fr/index.php/2008/05/26/390-histoire-des-sciences-les-preuves-de-la-relativite
"Au début du XXème siècle, des scientifiques comme le Britannique
Arthur Eddington avaient tant à coeur de vérifier la théorie de la
relativité qu'ils ont tout mis en oeuvre pour que leurs expériences
soient probantes."
(ECOUTEZ!)

> > Nothing wrong with gravitational lensing though. It is plainly Newtonian.
>
> Except it is wrong by a factor of two.

Which equation is consistent with the gravitational redshift factor
1+V/c^2 experimentally confirmed by Pound and Rebka: Einstein's 1911
equation c'=c(1+V/c^2) given by Newton's emission theory of light, or
Einstein's 1915 "improved" equation c'=c(1+2V/c^2)?

Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com