🚀 go-pugleaf

On Feb 6, 12:02�pm, Randy Poe <poespam-t...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Feb 6, 1:54 pm, Randy Poe <poespam-t...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 6, 12:39 pm, Albertito <albertito1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On 6 feb, 16:48, "Androcles" <Headmas...@Hogwarts.physics> wrote:
>
> > > > <srp2...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > > >news:4695358e-db97-4485-94b4-06f417a451d4@i7g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> > > > On 6 f�v, 02:34, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > >http://philipball.blogspot.com/2007/09/arthur-eddington-was-innocent-...
> > > > > "With the technology then available, measuring the bending of
> > > > > starlight was very challenging. And contrary to popular belief,
> > > > > Newtonian physics did not predict that light would remain undeflected
> > > > > - Einstein himself pointed out in 1911 that Newtonian gravity should
> > > > > cause some deviation too. So the matter was not that of an all-or-
> > > > > nothing shift in stars' positions, but hinged on the exact numbers."
>
> > > > | Right.
>
> > > > | Classical Newtonian mechanics predicts that light will bend with
> > > > | twice the angle observed.
>
> > > > How?
>
> > > I'll tell you how. In order to see how newtonian gravity can
> > > bend the trajectory of a photon, relativists fake it. They
> > > magically tranform a photon with energy E into a particle
> > > with mass m = E/2c^2, it is saying �half the mass in E = mc^2.
> > > Then, relativists assume that particle passes by the massive
> > > body from infinity travelling locally at c, and then they can
> > > apply newtonian gravity to see how its trajectory is deflected
> > > into a hyperbolic one. As a result there is a deflection angle
> > > twice the observed one. A particle with mass m = E/c^2,
> > > travelling locally at c from infinity, would be deflected in
> > > the correct angle, under newtonian gravity.
>
> > Why don't you do the Newtonian calculation before
> > making this claim?
>
> I'll give you a hint: When you have a mass moving
> under the influence of a much heavier mass (say, a
> planet moving under the influence of the sun, or
> a moon moving around the planet), does anything in
> the orbit depend on the mass of the lighter object?
>
> That is, if the moon's mass were half what it is,
> would it have a different path around the earth?
>
> If you started a satellite in orbit around the
> earth, and another satellite with half the mass in
> the same starting orbit, would they continue in
> the same orbit?
>
> If you fire a projectile from a gun, and then
> another with the same initial velocity but half
> the mass, does it follow a different path (neglecting
> air resistance)?
>
> Once you've pondered that, decide whether you really
> believe that two particles with different mass but
> the same starting trajectory as they approach the
> sun follow different paths.
>
> � � � � � � � �- Randy- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Randy,
    Good to see that you decided to look up the principle of
equivalence.
Robert B. Winn