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

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #613058 > unrolled thread

Re: Part II: How Einstein cooked the paper that made him famous worldwide

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Part II: How Einstein cooked the paper that made him famous worldwide Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2023-06-16 14:34 -0700
    Re: Part II: How Einstein cooked the paper that made him famous worldwide JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-06-16 15:39 -0700
      Re: Part II: How Einstein cooked the paper that made him famous worldwide The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-06-16 20:43 -0700
      Re: Part II: How Einstein cooked the paper that made him famous worldwide Demetrios Laar <emmo@ratrileo.tt> - 2023-06-17 14:20 +0000

#613058 — Re: Part II: How Einstein cooked the paper that made him famous worldwide

On Tuesday, November 30, 2021 at 8:24:38 PM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote:
> This OP addresses how Einstein cooked the GR equation for vacuum, which 
> allowed him to reach to a desired form of his equation 11: 
> 
> (11) (dx/dφ)² = 2A/B² + α/B² x −x² + αx³ 
> 
> at which he introduces his fix with the cubic term, being α the Schwarzschild radius. A is the energy of the system and B is the angular moment, both being 
> constants because they are conserved values in orbital dynamics of planets. 
> 
> The previous equation before replacing x = 1/r didn't appear in the paper, but is 
> 
> (1/r² dr/dφ)² = 2A/B² + (2GMm²/L²) 1/r - 1/r² + (2MG/c²) 1/r³ 
> 
> where I reintroduced the physical values of G, M, c and m for clarity. I'll 
> continue with geometrical units (all of them made equal to 1). 
> 
> This equation is derived from the general newtonian expression for orbital 
> dynamics in polar coordinates, around the equator of the Sun (Planetary 
> Motion part on his paper): 
> 
> (Equations 8, 8a) 1/2 u² + ɸ = A ; u² = dr²/ds² + r² (dφ/ds)² ; r² dφ/ds = B 
> 
> Cheat 1: Even when he resigned to analyze the motion u(τ) of Mercury by 
> only accounting time in period T units, he didn't get rid of τ , as he uses s= cτ. 
> 
> Cheat 2: He resigned the entire concept of relativity by assuming τ = t, 
> what will give his equations the value of absolute time and absolute space 
> as the system being centered on (0,0,0) xyz coordinates and measured 
> from Earth, in order to match data from observational astronomy of that 
> epoch, without considering the speed of light and the delays. 
> 
> In equation 8a, he introduces the gravitational potential as ɸ = - α/2r, 
> which is used to disguise the fact that α = 2MG/c² (Schwarzschild radius) 
> has been introduced in the beginning, hence the 1/2 factor. 
> 
> Then, the equation for orbital dynamics is PURELY newtonian. 
> 
> As r² (dφ/ds)² = B²/r², then the equation 1/2 u² + ɸ = A can be written as: 
> 
> u(τ)² = 2A - 2ɸ 
> 
> Cheat 3: He knows that the above equation is pure newtonian and is not 
> bringing him anywhere. So he cheats by modifying his Eq. 8 and ɸ by: 
> 
> (Eq. 7c) ɸ = - α/2r (1 + B²/r²), so he can get the four terms of the polynomial. 
> 
> u(τ)² = 2A - α/r - αB²/r³ , what allows 
> 
> dr²/ds² + r² (dφ/ds)² = 2A - α/r - αB²/r³ OR (remember r² (dφ/ds)) 
> 
> dr²/ds² + r² (dφ/ds)² = 2A - α/r - αB²/r³ - B² (dφ/ds) 
> 
> As s = τ (c = 1), he needs to get rid of time τ. 
> In parallel, and going back to coordinates x₁, x₂, x₃, x₄, he manages to get 
> 
> (Eq. 9) dx₄/ds = 1 + α/r 
> 
> Einstein manages to reach Equation 7b, using 6c, 8, 9 and 10: 
> 
> d²xᵤ/ds² = -αxᵤ/r³ (1 - 2A + 3 B²/r²) 
> 
> Cheat 4: In the solution of this differential equation he find the term 
> s√[(1 - 2A) and determine that is equal to s (probably because A << 1), 
> but still a cheat because is mixing time with THE ENERGY of the system. 
> 
> Now, with the advantage of not having all the equations numbered, and 
> confusingly numbering without a sequential order, he performs a QUANTUM LEAP 
> from Equation 7c to the desired Equation 11, by replacing r with 1/x: 
> 
> And proudly claims: 
> 
> "One eliminates ds from this equation with the help of (10), and so 
> obtains, in which one designates by x the magnitude 1/r: 
> 
> (11) (dx/dφ)² = 2A/B² + α/B² x −x² + αx³ 
> 
> which equation distinguishes itself from the corresponding Newtonian theory only through the last member on the right side." 
> 
> As I have demonstrated in two previous thread with similar topic, the 
> solution of this first order differential equation and his calculation for 
> one orbit of Mercury, only renders a differential excess from 2π: 
> 
> ε = 1.6734E-07 rad/ orbit (0.03435 arcsec/ orbit), which gives only 
> 14.33” of arc/century (1/3 of the alleged 43”). 
> 
> But, still, this paper was celebrated by him as a triumph of HIS general 
> theory of relativity. The deflection of light by 1.75", briefly mentioned in 
> the paper, was "verified" by Eddington's expedition 3 years later. 
> 
> But this paper, on Nov.18, 1915 is what made him worldwide famous. 
> 
> NEVER, even 10 years after, did Einstein show the calculations that gave 
> the 1.75" of star light deflection when passing by Sun's surface. 
> 
> Even when KNOWN ASTRONOMERS in the world reclaimed for the 
> theoretical calculations, not a single one received a copy. 
> 
> Only the Einstein's ass kissers, in the years to come (and even today), 
> would RECREATE THE CALCULATIONS but using the MODIFIED Schwarzschild metric, the one that Hilbert derived in 1917. 
> 
> Had ANYONE used the original 1916 Schwarzschild metric, WOULD NOT 
> have get the 1.75" because the theory that Einstein and Schwarzschild 
> was INCORRECT, as they didn't used the latest Hilbert's equations, which 
> would be available for Einstein 1 WEEK after that day Nov. 18, 1915. 
> 
> Schwarzschild is not to blame here. Hilbert, one year after his death, 
> HONORED Schwarzschild by naming the correct metric after him. 
> 
> The same metric that everyone uses for ANYTHING today (GPS, Mercury, 
> black holes, whatever). 
> 
> This is the conclusion: Einstein committed fraud on this paper through 
> and through, in the GR part and in the basic calculus part to solve (11).

I've read again the OP in this thread, and I find the explanations of the fraud (to plagiarize Gerber final formula) just brilliant.

But negationism and out casting of detractors are the most important weapons that relativists have.

Even Schwarzschild slapped Einstein on the subject of Mercury, in the paper where he developed HIS general solution for the challenge.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#613060

On Friday, June 16, 2023 at 2:34:55 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 30, 2021 at 8:24:38 PM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote:
> > This OP addresses how Einstein cooked the GR equation for vacuum, which 
> > allowed him to reach to a desired form of his equation 11: 
> > 
> > (11) (dx/dφ)² = 2A/B² + α/B² x −x² + αx³ 
> > 
> > at which he introduces his fix with the cubic term, being α the Schwarzschild radius. A is the energy of the system and B is the angular moment, both being 
> > constants because they are conserved values in orbital dynamics of planets. 
> > 
> > The previous equation before replacing x = 1/r didn't appear in the paper, but is 
> > 
> > (1/r² dr/dφ)² = 2A/B² + (2GMm²/L²) 1/r - 1/r² + (2MG/c²) 1/r³ 
> > 
> > where I reintroduced the physical values of G, M, c and m for clarity. I'll 
> > continue with geometrical units (all of them made equal to 1). 
> > 
> > This equation is derived from the general newtonian expression for orbital 
> > dynamics in polar coordinates, around the equator of the Sun (Planetary 
> > Motion part on his paper): 
> > 
> > (Equations 8, 8a) 1/2 u² + ɸ = A ; u² = dr²/ds² + r² (dφ/ds)² ; r² dφ/ds = B 
> > 
> > Cheat 1: Even when he resigned to analyze the motion u(τ) of Mercury by 
> > only accounting time in period T units, he didn't get rid of τ , as he uses s= cτ. 
> > 
> > Cheat 2: He resigned the entire concept of relativity by assuming τ = t, 
> > what will give his equations the value of absolute time and absolute space 
> > as the system being centered on (0,0,0) xyz coordinates and measured 
> > from Earth, in order to match data from observational astronomy of that 
> > epoch, without considering the speed of light and the delays. 
> > 
> > In equation 8a, he introduces the gravitational potential as ɸ = - α/2r, 
> > which is used to disguise the fact that α = 2MG/c² (Schwarzschild radius) 
> > has been introduced in the beginning, hence the 1/2 factor. 
> > 
> > Then, the equation for orbital dynamics is PURELY newtonian. 
> > 
> > As r² (dφ/ds)² = B²/r², then the equation 1/2 u² + ɸ = A can be written as: 
> > 
> > u(τ)² = 2A - 2ɸ 
> > 
> > Cheat 3: He knows that the above equation is pure newtonian and is not 
> > bringing him anywhere. So he cheats by modifying his Eq. 8 and ɸ by: 
> > 
> > (Eq. 7c) ɸ = - α/2r (1 + B²/r²), so he can get the four terms of the polynomial. 
> > 
> > u(τ)² = 2A - α/r - αB²/r³ , what allows 
> > 
> > dr²/ds² + r² (dφ/ds)² = 2A - α/r - αB²/r³ OR (remember r² (dφ/ds)) 
> > 
> > dr²/ds² + r² (dφ/ds)² = 2A - α/r - αB²/r³ - B² (dφ/ds) 
> > 
> > As s = τ (c = 1), he needs to get rid of time τ. 
> > In parallel, and going back to coordinates x₁, x₂, x₃, x₄, he manages to get 
> > 
> > (Eq. 9) dx₄/ds = 1 + α/r 
> > 
> > Einstein manages to reach Equation 7b, using 6c, 8, 9 and 10: 
> > 
> > d²xᵤ/ds² = -αxᵤ/r³ (1 - 2A + 3 B²/r²) 
> > 
> > Cheat 4: In the solution of this differential equation he find the term 
> > s√[(1 - 2A) and determine that is equal to s (probably because A << 1), 
> > but still a cheat because is mixing time with THE ENERGY of the system. 
> > 
> > Now, with the advantage of not having all the equations numbered, and 
> > confusingly numbering without a sequential order, he performs a QUANTUM LEAP 
> > from Equation 7c to the desired Equation 11, by replacing r with 1/x: 
> > 
> > And proudly claims: 
> > 
> > "One eliminates ds from this equation with the help of (10), and so 
> > obtains, in which one designates by x the magnitude 1/r: 
> > 
> > (11) (dx/dφ)² = 2A/B² + α/B² x −x² + αx³ 
> > 
> > which equation distinguishes itself from the corresponding Newtonian theory only through the last member on the right side." 
> > 
> > As I have demonstrated in two previous thread with similar topic, the 
> > solution of this first order differential equation and his calculation for 
> > one orbit of Mercury, only renders a differential excess from 2π: 
> > 
> > ε = 1.6734E-07 rad/ orbit (0.03435 arcsec/ orbit), which gives only 
> > 14.33” of arc/century (1/3 of the alleged 43”). 
> > 
> > But, still, this paper was celebrated by him as a triumph of HIS general 
> > theory of relativity. The deflection of light by 1.75", briefly mentioned in 
> > the paper, was "verified" by Eddington's expedition 3 years later. 
> > 
> > But this paper, on Nov.18, 1915 is what made him worldwide famous. 
> > 
> > NEVER, even 10 years after, did Einstein show the calculations that gave 
> > the 1.75" of star light deflection when passing by Sun's surface. 
> > 
> > Even when KNOWN ASTRONOMERS in the world reclaimed for the 
> > theoretical calculations, not a single one received a copy. 
> > 
> > Only the Einstein's ass kissers, in the years to come (and even today), 
> > would RECREATE THE CALCULATIONS but using the MODIFIED Schwarzschild metric, the one that Hilbert derived in 1917. 
> > 
> > Had ANYONE used the original 1916 Schwarzschild metric, WOULD NOT 
> > have get the 1.75" because the theory that Einstein and Schwarzschild 
> > was INCORRECT, as they didn't used the latest Hilbert's equations, which 
> > would be available for Einstein 1 WEEK after that day Nov. 18, 1915. 
> > 
> > Schwarzschild is not to blame here. Hilbert, one year after his death, 
> > HONORED Schwarzschild by naming the correct metric after him. 
> > 
> > The same metric that everyone uses for ANYTHING today (GPS, Mercury, 
> > black holes, whatever). 
> > 
> > This is the conclusion: Einstein committed fraud on this paper through 
> > and through, in the GR part and in the basic calculus part to solve (11).
> I've read again the OP in this thread, and I find the explanations of the fraud (to plagiarize Gerber final formula) just brilliant. 
> 
> But negationism and out casting of detractors are the most important weapons that relativists have. 
> 
> Even Schwarzschild slapped Einstein on the subject of Mercury, in the paper where he developed HIS general solution for the challenge.

Idiocies, as always.

--
Jan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#613076

JanPB wrote:
> 
> On Friday, June 16, 2023 at 2:34:55 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
> > On Tuesday, November 30, 2021 at 8:24:38 PM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote:
> > > This OP addresses how Einstein cooked the GR equation for vacuum, which
> > > allowed him to reach to a desired form of his equation 11:
> > >
> > > (11) (dx/dφ)² = 2A/B² + α/B² x −x² + αx³
> > >
> > > at which he introduces his fix with the cubic term, being α the Schwarzschild radius. A is the energy of the system and B is the angular moment, both being
> > > constants because they are conserved values in orbital dynamics of planets.
> > >
> > > The previous equation before replacing x = 1/r didn't appear in the paper, but is
> > >
> > > (1/r² dr/dφ)² = 2A/B² + (2GMm²/L²) 1/r - 1/r² + (2MG/c²) 1/r³
> > >
> > > where I reintroduced the physical values of G, M, c and m for clarity. I'll
> > > continue with geometrical units (all of them made equal to 1).
> > >
> > > This equation is derived from the general newtonian expression for orbital
> > > dynamics in polar coordinates, around the equator of the Sun (Planetary
> > > Motion part on his paper):
> > >
> > > (Equations 8, 8a) 1/2 u² + ɸ = A ; u² = dr²/ds² + r² (dφ/ds)² ; r² dφ/ds = B
> > >
> > > Cheat 1: Even when he resigned to analyze the motion u(Ï„) of Mercury by
> > > only accounting time in period T units, he didn't get rid of τ , as he uses s= cτ.
> > >
> > > Cheat 2: He resigned the entire concept of relativity by assuming Ï„ = t,
> > > what will give his equations the value of absolute time and absolute space
> > > as the system being centered on (0,0,0) xyz coordinates and measured
> > > from Earth, in order to match data from observational astronomy of that
> > > epoch, without considering the speed of light and the delays.
> > >
> > > In equation 8a, he introduces the gravitational potential as ɸ = - α/2r,
> > > which is used to disguise the fact that α = 2MG/c² (Schwarzschild radius)
> > > has been introduced in the beginning, hence the 1/2 factor.
> > >
> > > Then, the equation for orbital dynamics is PURELY newtonian.
> > >
> > > As r² (dφ/ds)² = B²/r², then the equation 1/2 u² + ɸ = A can be written as:
> > >
> > > u(τ)² = 2A - 2ɸ
> > >
> > > Cheat 3: He knows that the above equation is pure newtonian and is not
> > > bringing him anywhere. So he cheats by modifying his Eq. 8 and ɸ by:
> > >
> > > (Eq. 7c) ɸ = - α/2r (1 + B²/r²), so he can get the four terms of the polynomial.
> > >
> > > u(τ)² = 2A - α/r - αB²/r³ , what allows
> > >
> > > dr²/ds² + r² (dφ/ds)² = 2A - α/r - αB²/r³ OR (remember r² (dφ/ds))
> > >
> > > dr²/ds² + r² (dφ/ds)² = 2A - α/r - αB²/r³ - B² (dφ/ds)
> > >
> > > As s = Ï„ (c = 1), he needs to get rid of time Ï„.
> > > In parallel, and going back to coordinates x₁, x₂, x₃, x₄, he manages to get
> > >
> > > (Eq. 9) dx₄/ds = 1 + α/r
> > >
> > > Einstein manages to reach Equation 7b, using 6c, 8, 9 and 10:
> > >
> > > d²xᵤ/ds² = -αxᵤ/r³ (1 - 2A + 3 B²/r²)
> > >
> > > Cheat 4: In the solution of this differential equation he find the term
> > > s√[(1 - 2A) and determine that is equal to s (probably because A << 1),
> > > but still a cheat because is mixing time with THE ENERGY of the system.
> > >
> > > Now, with the advantage of not having all the equations numbered, and
> > > confusingly numbering without a sequential order, he performs a QUANTUM LEAP
> > > from Equation 7c to the desired Equation 11, by replacing r with 1/x:
> > >
> > > And proudly claims:
> > >
> > > "One eliminates ds from this equation with the help of (10), and so
> > > obtains, in which one designates by x the magnitude 1/r:
> > >
> > > (11) (dx/dφ)² = 2A/B² + α/B² x −x² + αx³
> > >
> > > which equation distinguishes itself from the corresponding Newtonian theory only through the last member on the right side."
> > >
> > > As I have demonstrated in two previous thread with similar topic, the
> > > solution of this first order differential equation and his calculation for
> > > one orbit of Mercury, only renders a differential excess from 2Ï€:
> > >
> > > ε = 1.6734E-07 rad/ orbit (0.03435 arcsec/ orbit), which gives only
> > > 14.33” of arc/century (1/3 of the alleged 43”).
> > >
> > > But, still, this paper was celebrated by him as a triumph of HIS general
> > > theory of relativity. The deflection of light by 1.75", briefly mentioned in
> > > the paper, was "verified" by Eddington's expedition 3 years later.
> > >
> > > But this paper, on Nov.18, 1915 is what made him worldwide famous.
> > >
> > > NEVER, even 10 years after, did Einstein show the calculations that gave
> > > the 1.75" of star light deflection when passing by Sun's surface.
> > >
> > > Even when KNOWN ASTRONOMERS in the world reclaimed for the
> > > theoretical calculations, not a single one received a copy.
> > >
> > > Only the Einstein's ass kissers, in the years to come (and even today),
> > > would RECREATE THE CALCULATIONS but using the MODIFIED Schwarzschild metric, the one that Hilbert derived in 1917.
> > >
> > > Had ANYONE used the original 1916 Schwarzschild metric, WOULD NOT
> > > have get the 1.75" because the theory that Einstein and Schwarzschild
> > > was INCORRECT, as they didn't used the latest Hilbert's equations, which
> > > would be available for Einstein 1 WEEK after that day Nov. 18, 1915.
> > >
> > > Schwarzschild is not to blame here. Hilbert, one year after his death,
> > > HONORED Schwarzschild by naming the correct metric after him.
> > >
> > > The same metric that everyone uses for ANYTHING today (GPS, Mercury,
> > > black holes, whatever).
> > >
> > > This is the conclusion: Einstein committed fraud on this paper through
> > > and through, in the GR part and in the basic calculus part to solve (11).
> > I've read again the OP in this thread, and I find the explanations of the fraud (to plagiarize Gerber final formula) just brilliant.
> >
> > But negationism and out casting of detractors are the most important weapons that relativists have.
> >
> > Even Schwarzschild slapped Einstein on the subject of Mercury, in the paper where he developed HIS general solution for the challenge.
> 
> Idiocies, as always.
> 
> --
> Jan

maybe he should get a different hobby???? this hobby is too relaxing and
pleasurable outside of his regular occupation...he should try...serial
killing! 





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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#613104

JanPB wrote:

>> Even Schwarzschild slapped Einstein on the subject of Mercury, in the
>> paper where he developed HIS general solution for the challenge.
> 
> Idiocies, as always.

you cannot see and plot the stars behind the sun, my friend. It's a fact. 
Even right now, it was fake like *_the_capitalist_american_moon_landing_*.

Now Zelensky and we are done. Ukraine shoots out its big mouth and Russia 
takes them out. Now find Zelensky's hide out and take him out.

*_The_green_midget_* dared to show himself yesterday 
*_after_treating_African_leaders_like_subhumans_* - maybe he's the target?

And he still cannot wear a suit like all leaders in a war. He was not a 
miltary Junta, so he should not be dressing as one. But we all know he is 
not the President of Ukraine. *_Hunter_Biden_is_*.

It's a near *_certainty_US_officials_were_killed_* in one of the previous 
two attacks on command centers. *_Victoria_Nuland_* may be one of the US 
officials killed. I have not seen her in public in quite some time. 🙏 
That would be awesome.

This is one of the most effective ways to decapitate NATO infrastructure 
inside Ukraine that is running the entire war. Without it, the neo-Nazis 
will raise the white flag of surrender. Thus, hit NATO where it hurts the 

We will send *_Mark_Milley_* and *_Loyd_Austin_* over there, stuff their 
fats azzes in the next command center. Just tell us which one.

Outstanding precision strike! 
*_Keep_up_the_momentum_team_Russia_.._*

 *_Russia_strikes_Ukrainian_'decision-making_center'_* – MOD
The attack was a success, and the intended facility was hit, Russia’s
Defense Ministry says
https://%72t.com/%72%75%73%73ia/578202-ukrainian-decision-making-strike/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web