🚀 go-pugleaf

"Australopithecus Afarensis" <fossil.lucy@cox.net> wrote in message
news:S57Fc.28849$6r1.19499@fed1read06...
> The following top topics that elevated Einstein into a Demigod needs to be
> examined again.  Einstein knew the answers and fudged GR to meet the first
> of the following.
>
> **  Mercury's orbit of advance
>
> Einstein had to mix coordinate system to arrive at his answer of 43" per
> century.  The observed data has a precision of less than 1".  The recent
> discovery of Dicke's Bulge certainly leaves no room for Einstein's
creative
> math.
>
> http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s6-02/6-02.htm
>
> **  Deflect of a photon near the sun
>
> GR is more or less boiled down to Newtonian mechanics.

Only someone who has no understanding of it could make such an obviously
absurd statement. GR is based on one experimental fact (the principle of
equivalence) and a key idea - no prior geometry.  Once you assume those the
EFE's almost derive themselves and from that Newton's theory is seen as a
limit.

> Yet, Newton's law of
> gravity does not allow a photon to be affected by gravity because a photon
> has zero rest mass.  Even applying realistic mass to a photon, the term
> (1-B^2) comes up to negate any gravitational influence on a photon (where
B
> = 1 for a photon).

It is a simple matter to derive the bending of light by gravity without
assuming it has mass as any good textbook on GR does.

> So, Newtonian Law (even with SR or LET applied) does not
> affect a photon in any way, and yet GR has to make it look like it is
twice
> the deflection of the Newtonian Law of Gravity.  But wait!
Experimentally,
> we do observe undeniably a photon being deflected.  Shipiro did also prove
> time dilation of a photon near a massive object.  The mystery is even more
> intriguing.

What is intriguing is someone would crap on about what they obviously do not
understand.  Can you actually name a book on GR you have studied?  Come on,
your big at criticizing it surely that must based on some study of the
subject at a detailed technical level?  Or are you simply frothing off at
the mouth?

Bill

>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Australopithecus Afarensis" <fossil.lucy@cox.net>
> Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,it.scienza
> Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 10:47 PM
> Subject: Re: Einstein, Dirac and so on....
>
> I am surprised you would rate Newton over Einstein, but I do agree with
you
> that Newton is the greatest physicist of all time.  The next one is
Maxwell.
> Einstein would not even rank the top 100 in my list.
>
> One genius who did not have anybody's work to build on besides data points
> but came up with something very respectable is Kepler.  Another one who
has
> his works covering hundred of volumes is Euler.  Euler won out by
quantity.
>
> Einstein would be a great physicist if his General Relativity is not based
> on the following two assumptions.
>
> **  Speed of light being the same every where
> **  No inertial frame of reference
>
> He has no excuse to make those assumptions, the Michelson-Morley
Experiment
> hinted against his assumptions:
>
> **  Relative speed of light being lowered through time dilation
> **  More inertial frame of reference through causality of photons
> (simultaneity of events)
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Bill Hobba" <bhobba@rubbish.net.au>
> Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,it.scienza
> Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 06:11 PM
> Subject: Re: Einstein, Dirac and so on....
>
> "Robert J. Kolker" <robert_kolker@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:l90Fc.10912$IQ4.4716@attbi_s02...
> >
> > davidoff404 wrote:
> >
> > > Besides, everyone knows that Hamilton was the "best"
> > > physicist/mathematician...
> >
> > Nope. It was Newton. He had to invent ALL his tools.
>
> Yep.  A recent survey of physicists rated Einstein ahead of Newton.  I do
no
> agree with that - he stands head an shoulders above them all including
> Einstein.  I believe he is also the greatest mathematical of all time -
but
> the issue is less clear cut - Gauss has a good claim as well.  The order
of
> my top 6 is - Newton, Einstein, Maxwell, Feynman, Landau and Dirac.  But
> that is only my opinion.
>
> Thanks
> Bill
>
>
>
>