🚀 go-pugleaf

On Jan 26, 11:44 am, Dieter Heidorn wrote:
> Koobee Wublee schrieb:

> > Have you not noticed that there are all claims and no specific
> > experiments shown with analyzable data given?
>
> See page 1:
>
> "Abstract
> The status of experimental tests of general relativity and of
> theoretical frameworks for analysing them is
>       _reviewed_."
>
> To all listed experiments are given references, for instance concerning
> light deflection:
>
> [165] Lebach, D.E., Corey, B.E., Shapiro, I.I., Ratner, M.I., Webber,
> J.C., Rogers, A.E.E., Davis, J.L., and Herring, T.A., "Measurement of
> the solar gravitational deflection of radio waves using
> very-long-baseline interferometry", Phys. Rev. Lett., 75, 1439-1442, (1995).
>
> [241] Shapiro, S.S., Davis, J.L., Lebach, D.E., and Gregory, J.S.,
> "Measurement of the solar gravitational deflection of radio waves using
> geodetic very-long-baseline interferometry data, 1979-1999", Phys. Rev.
> Lett., 92, 121101, (2004).
>
> [116] Froeschl´e, M., Mignard, F., and Arenou, F., "Determination of the
> PPN parameter gamma with the Hipparcos data", in Proceedings from the
> Hipparcos Venice '97 Symposium, Proceedings of the symposium held on
> 13-16May 1997, (ESA, Noordwijk, Netherlands, 1997).
>
> ...and so on.

Well, all these are talking about the interferometry of signals.
There is only one signal involved.  How do you get the signal to
interfere with itself and get meaningful data?

> > I am still not convinced this 240uSec is qualified.
>
> Irwin I. Shapiro et al.: Fourth Test of General Relativity: New Radar
> Result. In: Physical Review Letters 26, 1971, S. 1132 - 1135

If you understand what he did, please explain how he qualified his
data.

> > Thus, the delay time is
>
> > dt = (4 G M / c^3) ln(4 a_E a_V / R^2)
>
> Agreed :-)

Yes, once again, thanks for your correction.

> > However, this does not mean
>
> > C(r) = c (1 + 2 U), k = 2
>
> > Or
>
> > C(r) = c (1 + U), k = 1
>
> > Under the concept of GR, the speed of light must be the same
> > everywhere.  That is
>
> > C(r) = c
>
> The difference between local and non-local must be considered - but we
> had that discussed already. I think we can end here.

If you have time, please explain how Shapiro qualified his data.
Otherwise, let's end here if you don't know either but choose to
embrace how one can pull a very small meaningful signal out of a sea
of incoherence.

> Thanks for the discussion.

Likewise, the pleasure is mine.

> I have collected my remarks concerning variable speed of light in GR on
> my homepage. Maybe you're interested to take a look:
>
> http://www.d1heidorn.homepage.t-online.de/Physik/VSL/VSL.html

I think it would be better if you also explain how one is able to
actually determine this delay time.