Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #617308

Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't.

Show key headers only | View raw

JanPB wrote:
> 
> On Thursday, August 10, 2023 at 7:57:07 AM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
> > On Thursday, August 10, 2023 at 1:07:34 AM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote:
> > > For more than 170 years, the influence of planets on the advance of Mercury's
> > > perihelion has been computed using, most of the time, Gauss torus gravity
> > > formulae. Only since the '60s, with the advent of computers powerful enough,
> > > new algorithms and direct numerical calculations have been used.
> > >
> > > Yet, the most known tables: Le Verrier (1854), Newcomb (1895), Clemence
> > > (1947) and Park (2017) share a common hypocrisy:
> > >
> > > All of them use infinite speed of gravity to compute the influence of planets
> > > on Mercury's perihelion advance, except for the 300,000 Km/s speed for the
> > > influence of the Sun over Mercury (spacetime), since Einstein's 1915.
> > >
> > > And all the tables, since 1895, assign 532"/cy to Newtonian influence, using
> > > INFINITE speed of gravity, and 43"/cy to GR spacetime twisted and bent at
> > > c speed.
> > >
> > > All the popularized tables, averaging 575"/cy, have similar values since 1895:
> > >
> > > 1) Merc-Venus pull, arcsec/orbit): 3.15E-02 ; Distance (light-sec): 167.7
> > > 2) Merc-Earth pull, arcsec/orbit): 1.03E-02 ; Distance (light-sec): 305.6
> > > 3) Merc-Mars pull, arcsec/orbit): 2.82E-04 ; Distance (light-sec): 566.8
> > > 4) Merc-Jupiter pull, arcsec/orbit): 1.75E-02 ; Distance (light-sec): 2,401.3
> > > 5) Merc-Saturn pull, arcsec/orbit): 8.32E-04 ; Distance (light-sec): 4,571.6
> > > 6) Merc-Uranus pull, arcsec/orbit): 1.62E-05 ; Distance (light-sec): 9,390.4
> > > 7) Merc-Neptune pull, arcsec/orbit): 4.82E-06 ; Distance (light-sec): 14,821.8
> > > 8) GR influence, arcsec/orbit): 4.89E-03, ; Distance (light-sec): 0
> > >
> > >
> > > Now, have relativists no shame?
> > >
> > > They mix Newton's influence of about 532"/cy, with gravity acting at
> > > INFINITE speed plus an additional 8% (43"/cy) acting at c speed, with
> > > no remorse. Pure hypocrisy.
> > >
> > > The real problems are:
> > >
> > > 1) GR is an HOAX, and the 43"/cy (even disputed by old and modern
> > > scholars), remain written in stone since the 1915 paper.
> > >
> > > 2) No matter which adjustment is made on the total gravitational pull,
> > > it's fixed that work in this way:
> > >
> > > Newton's influence/cy + UNKNOWNS + 43"/cy = 575.3"/cy
> > >
> > > The last publicized table (2017, Park et all) made UNKNOWNS = 0,
> > > assigning errors to computes in solar oblateness.
> > >
> > > And the INFINITE speed of gravity is not questioned at all in the result
> > > of 5.3231 arcsec/year.
> > >
> > > Any comment, indoctrinated relativists?
> > As I thought, not a single idea come out to refute anything on the OP.
> 
> That's because your post is nonsense, as usual, and people who know
> this stuff simply get bored of posting the obvious sometimes. We also
> have other, frequently much more interesting, things to do.
> 
> > Relativity is an HOAX,
> 
> Again, nonsense. Meaning that it's not even wrong, it's just complete
> meaningless conceptual chaos. Relativity CAN be critiques, just like
> any other theory (not only in physics) but it takes knowledge and
> brains to do it. It cannot be done by pretending a monomania refers
> to a real thing.
> 
> One more time: see a doctor. There is something odd going on with
> your emotional responses to certain facets of everyday life.
> 
> --
> Jan

i don't don't if you are 'self-aware' Jan, but you beginning to sound
like you're always talking about yourself...


maybe...YOU...are the one who is searching for a new hobby, or whish you
had one many moons ago.


in other words, your whole life is a mistake.


doctors cannot help you...it's too late, isn't it?




-- 
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
 to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge
 the unchallengeable.

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Mercury mystery:  Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-09 21:07 -0700
  Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-10 07:57 -0700
    Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-08-10 12:18 -0700
      Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-08-10 14:43 -0700
        Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-08-10 15:04 -0700
          Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-08-10 16:00 -0700
          Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-08-11 13:35 -0700
      Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-10 14:50 -0700
        Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-08-10 15:05 -0700
          Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-10 16:15 -0700
          Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-10 21:54 -0700
        Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-10 15:23 -0700
        Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-10 15:28 -0700
          Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-10 15:37 -0700
            Ceank Richard Hertz admits he's retarded "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-10 15:44 -0700
          Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-10 17:46 -0500
          Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-10 16:16 -0700
            Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-10 16:35 -0700
              Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-08-10 18:53 -0700
                Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-11 07:21 -0700
                Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-11 11:44 -0700
              Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-11 11:34 -0700
                Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-08-11 12:22 -0700
            Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-10 19:38 -0500
          Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-10 16:19 -0700
  Re: Mercury mystery: Explain this, relativists. I bet you can't. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-10 15:15 -0700

csiph-web