• NASA online ephemerides for 1.3 million celestial bodies, 100% based on

    From Richard Hertz@21:1/5 to All on Sat Oct 7 20:04:30 2023
    The JPL Horizons on-line ephemeris system provides access to solar system data and customizable production of accurate ephemerides for observers, mission-planners, researchers, and the public, by numerically characterizing the location, motion, and
    observability of solar system objects as a function of time, as seen from locations within the solar system.

    Available objects include 1,229,000+ asteroids, 3822 comets, 211 natural satellites, all planets, the Sun, 202 spacecraft, and several dynamical points such as Earth-Sun L1, L2, L4, L5, Earth-Moon L1, L2, L4, L5 and planetary system barycenters.
    Ephemerides, lighting, and visibility for points on the surface of distant bodies may also be generated.

    Over 2300 predefined Earth station locations (observatories) are available, from which to generate relative ephemerides. Users may define their own topocentric observing site coordinates on any planet or natural satellite having a known rotational model,
    if the desired site is not predefined.

    All the data is based on Kepler/Newton, without a trace of relativity, and is used freely by amateurs or researches to obtain ephemerides with resolution from 1 minute, 1 hour or 1 day, covering a time span of 20,000 years.

    Major resolution in time is available under request. Data can be downloaded
    in different formats, coordinate centers and target bodies (like Mercury).

    https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/horizons/app.html#/

    NOT A SINGLE MENTION OF RELATIVITY, IN PARTICULAR GR.

    As this site, dedicated to the Solar System, is used worldwide and has equivalents in ESA and Roscosmos, is valid to ask WHY GR is ignored,
    if data provided has a resolution of 16 DECIMAL DIGITS for every parameter
    of orbits of the 1.2+ million objects.

    This site represents the value of TRUE SCIENCE, against the crap of GR.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bill@21:1/5 to Richard Hertz on Sat Oct 7 21:05:43 2023
    On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 8:04:33 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
    All the data is based on Kepler/Newton, without a trace of relativity...

    From the technical report on that site:

    "This section presents the dynamical models of the planetary and lunar ephemerides... The point-mass interaction between planetary bodies is governed by the parameterized post-Newtonian (PPN) formulation (Will and Nordtvedt, 1972; Moyer 2003)

    [Equation 27, the general relativity post-Newtonian formula]

    where the summations are over all bodies, and beta and gamma are the Eddington-Robertson-Schiff parameters representing the measure of nonlinearity in the superposition law for gravity and the amount of space curvature produced by a unit rest mass,
    respectively, and are constrained to unity as predicted by the general theory of relativity (GTR)."

    This site represents the value of TRUE SCIENCE...

    Indeed.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Richard Hertz@21:1/5 to Bill on Sat Oct 7 21:57:24 2023
    On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 1:05:45 AM UTC-3, Bill wrote:
    On Saturday, October 7, 2023 at 8:04:33 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
    All the data is based on Kepler/Newton, without a trace of relativity...

    From the technical report on that site:

    "This section presents the dynamical models of the planetary and lunar ephemerides... The point-mass interaction between planetary bodies is governed by the parameterized post-Newtonian (PPN) formulation (Will and Nordtvedt, 1972; Moyer 2003)

    [Equation 27, the general relativity post-Newtonian formula]

    where the summations are over all bodies, and beta and gamma are the Eddington-Robertson-Schiff parameters representing the measure of nonlinearity in the superposition law for gravity and the amount of space curvature produced by a unit rest mass,
    respectively, and are constrained to unity as predicted by the general theory of relativity (GTR)."

    This site represents the value of TRUE SCIENCE...

    Indeed.

    https://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/planets/approx_pos.html

    Approximate Positions of the Planets

    Lower accuracy formulae for planetary positions have a number of important applications when one doesn’t need the full accuracy of an integrated ephemeris. They are often used in observation scheduling, telescope pointing, and prediction of certain
    phenomena as well as in the planning and design of spacecraft missions.

    Approximate positions of the planets may be found by using Keplerian formulae with their associated elements and rates. Such elements are not intended to represent any sort of mean; they are simply the result of being adjusted for a best fit. As such, it
    must be noted that the elements are not valid outside the given time-interval over which they were fit.

    High precision ephemerides for the planets are available via the Horizons system.
    .......
    Formulae for using the Keplerian elements

    Keplerian elements given in the tables below are

    1. semi-major axis [au, au/century]
    2. eccentricity
    3. inclination [degrees, degrees/century]
    4. mean longitude [degrees, degrees/century]
    5. longitude of perihelion [degrees, degrees/century]
    6. longitude of the ascending node [degrees, degrees/century]

    ***********************************************

    This SIX Keplerian elements are the basis for the entire construction of the algorithms built in the Horizons software.

    The formulae to generate them are based on the developments explained in the same page, and have been used for MORE THAN 200 YEARS!

    QUOTE:
    In order to obtain the coordinates of one of the planets at a given Julian ephemeris date, T_eph,

    1) Compute the value of each of that planet's six elements:
    2) Compute the argument of perihelion, w , and the mean anomaly, M.
    3) Obtain the eccentric anomaly E, by recursion.
    4) Compute the planet's heliocentric coordinates in its orbital plane, x', y', z'.
    5) Compute the coordinates, (x_ecl, y_ecl, z_ecl) , in the J2000 ecliptic plane, with the x-axis aligned toward the equinox.
    6) If desired, obtain the equatorial coordinates in the "ICRF" or "J2000 frame", (x_eq y_eq, z_eq)
    END QUOTE

    FAQ QUOTE:
    Q: I want to write my own solar system "calculator". Where do I find the relevant equations?

    A: The following books provide fundamental equations used in celestial mechanics.

    “Explanatory Supplement to the Astronomical Almanac”, ed. P. K. Seidelmann, 1992, University Science Books.
    “Fundamentals of Astrodynamics”, R.R. Bate, D.D. Mueller, J.E. White, 1971, Dover Publications, Inc.
    “Fundamentals of Celestial Mechanics”, J.M.A. Danby, 1992, Willmann-Bell.
    “Methods of Orbit Determination for the Micro Computer”, D. Boulet, 1991, Willmann-Bell.
    “Orbital Mechanics”, J.E. Prussing, B.A. Conway, 1993, Oxford University Press.
    “Orbits for Amateurs with a Microcomputer”, D. Tattersfield, 1984, Halsted Press.
    “Spherical Astronomy”, R. M. Green, 1985, Cambridge University Press.
    “Vectorial Astrometry”, C.A. Murray, 1983, Adam Hilger Ltd.
    END QUOTE


    I've used these formulae TO VERIFY Horizons data IN THE OSCULATING MODE (classic) and made its conversion to STATE VECTORS (position, velocity).

    Then, I compared each result with the OUTPUT of the Horizons database for 3 orbital periods, with 1 hour resolution (more than 6,300 lines of data), in
    the OSCULATING PARAMETERS mode. Then I compared equal amount of data in the STATE VECTORS mode, with a 100% match.

    These parameters, generated by Keplerian/Newtonian math, are used by thousands of observatories (in high resolution mode) and hundred of thousand
    amateurs and professional in almost every country of the world, as it's the most complete online ephemerides data resource that exist.

    What you wrote about, which I couldn't find in the site, is probably an alternative source of information FOR RELATIVISTS.

    NASA depends on JPL to obtain data for its projects, based on Kepler-Newton.

    As you can see, not a trace of GR DERIVED PPN in the four types of outputs:

    1. Observer Table
    2. Vector Table
    3. Osculating Orbital Elements
    4. Small-Body SPK File


    Why don't give it a try, and also make a fact-check? It's fun, but no GR/PPN ANYWHERE (sorry for that).



    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Richard Hertz@21:1/5 to Bill on Sun Oct 8 11:03:03 2023
    On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 1:05:45 AM UTC-3, Bill wrote:

    <snip>

    From the technical report on that site:

    "This section presents the dynamical models of the planetary and lunar ephemerides... The point-mass interaction between planetary bodies is governed by the parameterized post-Newtonian (PPN) formulation (Will and Nordtvedt, 1972; Moyer 2003)

    [Equation 27, the general relativity post-Newtonian formula]

    where the summations are over all bodies, and beta and gamma are the Eddington-Robertson-Schiff parameters representing the measure of nonlinearity in the superposition law for gravity and the amount of space curvature produced by a unit rest mass,
    respectively, and are constrained to unity as predicted by the general theory of relativity (GTR)."

    <snip>

    Didn't cost too much for me to find out from WHERE your BIASED post was quoting the first paragraph. As usual, for a DECEIVING RELATIVIST LIKE YOU,
    you tried to pass the above info AS IF it was declared within the JPL Horizons website.

    Your post is A LIE, A DECEPTIVE ATTEMPT to discredit my fact-based assertion that JPL Horizons is based ONLY on Kepler-Newton, which IS TRUE.

    Your post IS FALSE. I don't understand why did you write such string of lies.

    This is the PAPER from which your comment was extracted:

    https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-3881/abd414

    Go to section "3.1. Point-mass Acceleration" and your quote is there, exactly 100% equal.

    But what you DON'T MENTION, which shows your true colors as a shill/troll, is that the paper:

    "The JPL Planetary and Lunar Ephemerides DE440 and DE441"
    Ryan S. Park, William M. Folkner, James G. Williams, and Dale H. Boggs
    Published 2021 February 8 • © 2021 Published by The American Astronomical Society. "

    is a work based on PPN, using keplerian data provided by NASA JPL, and is RESEARCH in applying linearized GR equations.

    Why did you lie? I can't understand your motives. This is the final closure of the paper:

    "The authors would like to thank A. Konopliv, R. Jacobson, J. Border, D. Jones, T. Morely, and F Budnik for providing some of the data used to compute DE440 and DE441. This research was carried out at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute
    of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Government sponsorship is acknowledged."

    They are stating clearly that the paper provided a new calculation of ephemerides to replace DE430 (previous general-purpose ephemerides released in 2014).

    Also, this work IS UNRELATED TO JPL Horizons database which, at any case, was the source of Keplerian/Newtonian data, which they used to compute
    ephemerides by using PPN equations (linearized GR).

    Do you understand, troll?

    Your initial comment: "From the technical report on that site" is ABSOLUTELY FALSE. You lied in order to discredit the OP, but it turns out that
    you discredited yourself, showing that you are a fucking liar and deceitful relativist, with a shill MO in order to twist the truth.

    Nothing different from what many thousands of cretins did, before you, in the last 100 years.

    You are a supporter of FAKE SCIENCE: RELATIVISM.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Richard Hertz@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 8 11:32:54 2023
    This is the basis of osculating orbital parameters for elliptical motion: A Keplerian-Newtonian model, as used by JPL Horizons database:

    https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Major-parameters-of-an-elliptical-orbit_fig4_229022121

    Periodically, JPL Horizons recompute basic parameters, based on thousands of observations made on Earth (optical, radioastronomy), and
    by different observatories in orbit and specific satellites. It applies to most of the major bodies in the database. Example of curve fitting:

    https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Observations-and-model-orbits-are-shown-for-two-representative-systems-from-those_fig1_372416658

    Using equations perfected for 200 years, since Euler's rotations of reference planes, data is modified in almost real time.

    This is an example of data on semi-major axis "a" and eccentricity "e" for Mercury, in an interval of 4 hours:

    Julian Date.............................Date................................a (Km)..................... e
    2460195,25000000 A.D. 2023-Sep-07 18: 57909248,74878 0,20563272552
    2460195,20833333 A.D. 2023-Sep-07 17: 57909248,42255 0,20563273224 2460195,29166666 A.D. 2023-Sep-07 19: 57909249,07077 0,20563271879
    2460195,16666666 A.D. 2023-Sep-07 16: 57909248,09210 0,20563273896

    The enormous amount of decimal digits is due to the results of elliptical curve fitting by using thousands of observations of different sources.

    And this information, which is online, is generated by algorithms perfected for more than 20/25 years.

    And yet, this information is "LOW RESOLUTION". If you want "HIGH RESOLUTION" you have to download binary files and use specific software, which is free.


    Kepler-Newton RULES. GR is a fucking joke.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Richard Hertz@21:1/5 to Richard Hertz on Sun Oct 8 11:40:20 2023
    On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 3:32:56 PM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote:
    This is the basis of osculating orbital parameters for elliptical motion: A Keplerian-Newtonian model, as used by JPL Horizons database:

    https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Major-parameters-of-an-elliptical-orbit_fig4_229022121

    Periodically, JPL Horizons recompute basic parameters, based on thousands of observations made on Earth (optical, radioastronomy), and
    by different observatories in orbit and specific satellites. It applies to most of the major bodies in the database. Example of curve fitting:

    https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Observations-and-model-orbits-are-shown-for-two-representative-systems-from-those_fig1_372416658

    Using equations perfected for 200 years, since Euler's rotations of reference planes, data is modified in almost real time.

    This is an example of data on semi-major axis "a" and eccentricity "e" for Mercury, in an interval of 4 hours:

    Julian Date.............................Date................................a (Km)..................... e
    2460195,25000000 A.D. 2023-Sep-07 18: 57909248,74878 0,20563272552 2460195,20833333 A.D. 2023-Sep-07 17: 57909248,42255 0,20563273224 2460195,29166666 A.D. 2023-Sep-07 19: 57909249,07077 0,20563271879 2460195,16666666 A.D. 2023-Sep-07 16: 57909248,09210 0,20563273896

    The enormous amount of decimal digits is due to the results of elliptical curve fitting by using thousands of observations of different sources.

    And this information, which is online, is generated by algorithms perfected for more than 20/25 years.

    And yet, this information is "LOW RESOLUTION". If you want "HIGH RESOLUTION" you have to download binary files and use specific software, which is free.


    Kepler-Newton RULES. GR is a fucking joke.


    My mistake. I posted data that was not correctly classified. This is a real example:

    Julian Date.............................Date................................a (Km)..................... e
    2460213,58333333.......A.D. 2023-Sep-26 02:.......57909092,6205815....0,2056293251622
    2460213,62500000.......A.D. 2023-Sep-26 03:.......57909092,3208225....0,2056293209803
    2460213,54166666.......A.D. 2023-Sep-26 01:.......57909092,9234421....0,2056293293836
    2460213,66666666.......A.D. 2023-Sep-26 04:.......57909092,0241722....0,2056293168379

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Richard Hertz@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 8 16:19:10 2023
    One proof that JPL Horizons online database provides PURE Kepler-Newton data;

    PERIHELION ADVANCE DURING THREE ORBITAL PERIODS IS PRACTICALLY ZERO ARCSECONDS.

    DATA:

    1) Mercury's orbital period: 87.96923544 days (average for 2,953 samples between 2023-Jul-10 00:00 and 2023-Nov-10 00:00)
    2) Mercury's perihelion advance per orbit: 0.0000734570 arcsec/orbit.

    3) GR prediction: 0.43 arcsec/year OR 0.103564055 arcsec/orbit.

    As it can see, the value 2) (coming from NASA JPL Horizons database) implies that the shift of the perihelion/orbit is almost NULL. The
    residual of 2), which is 1,400+ times lower than what was used in GR by 1915, demonstrates that orbits (Mercury's one in this case) are
    PURE NEWTONIAN, as the advance of perihelion of Mercury/orbit is EXACTLY 360°, which shows a NULL PRECESSION.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Prokaryotic Capase Homolog@21:1/5 to Richard Hertz on Sun Oct 8 20:13:57 2023
    On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 6:19:12 PM UTC-5, Richard Hertz wrote:
    One proof that JPL Horizons online database provides PURE Kepler-Newton data;

    PERIHELION ADVANCE DURING THREE ORBITAL PERIODS IS PRACTICALLY ZERO ARCSECONDS.

    DATA:

    1) Mercury's orbital period: 87.96923544 days (average for 2,953 samples between 2023-Jul-10 00:00 and 2023-Nov-10 00:00)
    2) Mercury's perihelion advance per orbit: 0.0000734570 arcsec/orbit.

    3) GR prediction: 0.43 arcsec/year OR 0.103564055 arcsec/orbit.

    As it can see, the value 2) (coming from NASA JPL Horizons database) implies that the shift of the perihelion/orbit is almost NULL. The
    residual of 2), which is 1,400+ times lower than what was used in GR by 1915, demonstrates that orbits (Mercury's one in this case) are
    PURE NEWTONIAN, as the advance of perihelion of Mercury/orbit is EXACTLY 360°, which shows a NULL PRECESSION.

    Both Paul Andersen and I have demonstrated that Mercury's perihelion shift
    is variable over time. The perihelion forwards and backwards depending on
    the precise alignment of the other planets, only ON AVERAGE advancing.

    If I remember correctly, Paul's results are somewhat better than mine, since he used precise orbital elements, whereas I was more approximate in my approach.

    One way or another, your objections are just plain stupid.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Prokaryotic Capase Homolog@21:1/5 to Prokaryotic Capase Homolog on Sun Oct 8 20:17:12 2023
    On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 10:14:00 PM UTC-5, Prokaryotic Capase Homolog wrote:

    Both Paul Andersen and I have demonstrated that Mercury's perihelion shift is variable over time. The perihelion forwards and backwards depending on the precise alignment of the other planets, only ON AVERAGE advancing.

    If I remember correctly, Paul's results are somewhat better than mine, since he used precise orbital elements, whereas I was more approximate in my approach.

    One way or another, your objections are just plain stupid.

    Typo
    "The perihelion forwards and backwards"
    should be
    "The perihelion moves forwards and backwards"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Richard Hertz@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 8 22:43:48 2023
    T24gTW9uZGF5LCBPY3RvYmVyIDksIDIwMjMgYXQgMTI6MTQ6MDDigK9BTSBVVEMtMywgUHJva2Fy eW90aWMgQ2FwYXNlIEhvbW9sb2cgd3JvdGU6DQoNCjxzbmlwPg0KDQo+IEJvdGggUGF1bCBBbmRl cnNlbiBhbmQgSSBoYXZlIGRlbW9uc3RyYXRlZCB0aGF0IE1lcmN1cnkncyBwZXJpaGVsaW9uIHNo aWZ0IA0KPiBpcyB2YXJpYWJsZSBvdmVyIHRpbWUuIFRoZSBwZXJpaGVsaW9uIGZvcndhcmRzIGFu ZCBiYWNrd2FyZHMgZGVwZW5kaW5nIG9uIA0KPiB0aGUgcHJlY2lzZSBhbGlnbm1lbnQgb2YgdGhl IG90aGVyIHBsYW5ldHMsIG9ubHkgT04gQVZFUkFHRSBhZHZhbmNpbmcuIA0KPiANCj4gSWYgSSBy ZW1lbWJlciBjb3JyZWN0bHksIFBhdWwncyByZXN1bHRzIGFyZSBzb21ld2hhdCBiZXR0ZXIgdGhh biBtaW5lLCBzaW5jZSANCj4gaGUgdXNlZCBwcmVjaXNlIG9yYml0YWwgZWxlbWVudHMsIHdoZXJl YXMgSSB3YXMgbW9yZSBhcHByb3hpbWF0ZSBpbiBteSBhcHByb2FjaC4gDQo+IA0KPiBPbmUgd2F5 IG9yIGFub3RoZXIsIHlvdXIgb2JqZWN0aW9ucyBhcmUganVzdCBwbGFpbiBzdHVwaWQuDQoNCkkg dGhpbmsgdGhhdCB5b3UgYXJlIHRoZSBwbGFpbiBzdHVwaWQsIGJlY2F1c2UgeW91IGRpZG4ndCB1 bmRlcnN0YW5kIG5vciB0aGUgdG9waWMgb2YgdGhpcyB0aHJlYWQgbmVpdGhlciBteSBwb3N0cy4N Cg0KSSBkb24ndCBjYXJlIHdoYXQgeW91IGFuZCBQYXVsIENBTENVTEFURUQuIEkgZGlkbid0IGNh bGN1bGF0ZSBzaGl0Lg0KDQpNeSBkYXRhIGhhcyBiZWVuIG9idGFpbmVkIGZyb20gdGhlIEpQTCBI b3Jpem9ucyBkYXRhYmFzZSwgd2hpbGUgSSB3YXMgc3R1ZHlpbmcgdGhlIHRyYW5zZm9ybWF0aW9u cyBiZXR3ZWVuDQpvc2N1bGF0aW5nIG9yYml0YWwgZWxlbWVudHMgKEtlcGxlcmlhbikgYW5kIFN0 YXRlIFZlY3RvcnMgKDNEIHBvc2l0aW9uLCAzRCB2ZWxvY2l0eSkgdXNpbmcgdGhlIFN1biBjZW50 ZXIgKG5vdCBiYXJ5Y2VudGVyKS4NCkkgZGlkIHRoZSBhYm92ZSB0byB1bmRlcnN0YW5kIE9SQklU QUwgTUVDSEFOSUNTIGFzIGFkdmFuY2VkIGFtYXRldXJzIGFuZCBwcm9mZXNzaW9uYWxzIGRvLg0K DQpBZnRlciBJIGxlYXJuZWQgaG93IHRvIHVzZSB0aGUgb25saW5lIGRhdGFiYXNlIGFuZCB0aGUg dHdvIHNldHMgb2YgZXF1YXRpb25zIChLZXBsZXJpYW4gLS0+IFNWIGFuZCBTViAtLS0tLS0+IEtl cGxlcmlhbiksDQpJIGdvdCBjdXJpb3VzIGFib3V0IHRoZSBzZWNvbmQga2luZCBvZiB0cmFuc2Zv cm1hdGlvbiwgd2hpY2ggZ2VuZXJhdGVkIHN5c3RlbWF0aWMgZXJyb3JzLg0KDQpPbmNlIEkgc29s dmVkIHRoYXQgcHJvYmxlbSwgaXQgb2NjdXJyZWQgdG8gbWUgdG8gdmVyaWZ5IGlmIHRoZSBoZWF2 eSBkYXRhIHRoYXQgSSBhY2N1bXVsYXRlZCBjZXJ0aWZpZWQgdGhhdCB0aGUgZGF0YWJhc2UNCndh cyBiYXNlZCBQVVJFTFkgb24gS2VwbGVyLU5ld3Rvbiwgd2hpY2ggSSBjb25maXJtZWQuDQoNCkkg ZG9uJ3QgcGxheSB3aXRoIG51bWJlcnMgYW5kIHRoZW9yaWVzLCBpbiBwYXJ0aWN1bGFyIHdoZW4g SSdtIGxlYXJuaW5nIHNvbWV0aGluZy4NCg0KSGVyZSBpcyBhbiBleHRyYWN0IG9mIHR3byBzYW1w bGVzIHRoYXQgcHJvdmUgdGhlIEtlcGxlci1OZXd0b24gYmFzaXMgb2YgdGhlIEpQTCBIb3Jpem9u cyBkYXRhYmFzZS4NCllvdSBETyBUSEUgTUFUSCwgYXMgeW91IGNsYWltIHRvIGJlIGFuIGV4cGVy dCAob3IgUGF1bCkuDQoNClRoZSBLRVkgaXMgdGhlIHRyYW5zaXRpb24gb2YgdGhlIFRSVUUgQU5P TUFMWSBmcm9tIDM2MMKwIHRvIDDCsC4gVGhhdCBwb2ludCBpcyB0aGUgUEVBSyBvZiB0aGUgcGVy aWhlbGlvbiwgZXhwcmVzc2VkIGluIDNELg0KWW91IGNhbiB1c2UgdGhpcyBwaWMgYXMgYSByZWZl cmVuY2UuDQpodHRwczovL2FpLXNvbHV0aW9ucy5jb20vX2ZyZWVmbHllcnVuaXZlcnNpdHlndWlk ZS9vcmJpdF9vcmllbnRhdGlvbi5odG0NCg0KQXMgSSBzYWlkLCBETyBUSEUgTUFUSC4gQW5kIGlm IHlvdSBkb24ndCB1bmRlcnN0YW5kIHRoZSBkYXRhLCBpdCdzIGJlY2F1c2UgeW91IGRvbid0IGtu b3cgc2hpdCBhYm91dCB0aGlzIHRvcGljLg0KRmFjdC1jaGVjayB1c2luZyB0aGUgSlBMIEhvcml6 b25zIGZvciBNZXJjdXJ5LCBvbiB0aGUgcGVyaW9kIHRoYXQgSSBwb3N0ZWQuDQpHT09EIExVQ0su DQoNCioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioN Cg0KUGFpciBvZiBjb250aWd1b3VzIHNhbXBsZXMgb3ZlciA2LDYwMSAoZnJvbSAgMjAyMy1KdWwt MTAgMDA6MDAgIHRvIDIwMjQtQXByLTEwIDAwOjAwKQ0KDQpTVEFSVElORyBQT0lOVCAod2hlbiBU cnVlIEFub21hbHkgdiBjcm9zc2VzIDDCsCkNClNhbXBsZeKApuKApuKApuKApuKApi4u4oCm4oCm Li4uLuKApi4uLi7igKYuMTgxOeKApuKApuKApuKApuKApuKApi4u4oCm4oCm4oCmLi4uLi4uLuKA pi4xODIwDQpKdWxpYW4gRGF0ZeKApuKApuKApi7igKYu4oCm4oCmLjI0NjAyMTEuMjXigKbigKbi gKYuLi4u4oCmLuKApuKApi4uLuKApi4yNDYwMjExLjI5MTY2NjY2DQpDYWxlbmRhciAoVERCKeKA puKApi7igKYuIEEuRC4gMjAyMy1TZXAtMjMgMTg6MDDigKbigKYuLiBBLkQuIDIwMjMtU2VwLTIz IDE5OjAwDQp2IMKwIChUcnVlIGFub21hbHkp4oCmLi4uMzU5Ljk4Mzg4ODkyMTI2OOKApuKApuKA puKApi4u4oCmLjAuMjQ4MzMyMjY2MTY5MzI4DQpQZXJpYXBzaXMgKEttKeKApi7igKbigKYuLi40 NjAwMTI4NC45MjgzOTAy4oCm4oCm4oCmLi4uLuKApi40NjAwMTI4NC45MjgzNzcNCmEgKEttKeKA puKApi4u4oCm4oCmLi4u4oCmLi4u4oCmLjU3OTA5MTE0LjEwMDgxMDPigKbigKbigKbigKYuLuKA pi41NzkwOTExMy42NDE4NzY4DQpl4oCm4oCm4oCm4oCm4oCm4oCmLi4u4oCm4oCm4oCmLi4uLuKA pi4wLjIwNTYyOTYyMDc4Mjg0NOKApuKApi4uLi4uLuKApi4wLjIwNTYyOTYxNDQ4NzYzNQ0KaSAg wrDigKbigKbigKbigKbigKYu4oCm4oCm4oCm4oCmLi4uLuKApi43LjAwMzU4ODc0ODQ2NTky4oCm LuKApi4u4oCmLuKApi4uNy4wMDM1ODg3NDkyNjQyMg0KzqkgIMKw4oCmLuKApuKApuKApi4uLuKA puKApuKApi4uLuKApi40OC4zMDA4MTgxNDQwMTfigKbigKYuLuKApuKApuKApi4uLjQ4LjMwMDgx ODE0NzY5MTkNCs+JICDCsOKApuKApuKApuKApuKApuKApi7igKbigKYuLi7igKYuMjkuMTkwMjgx MjQ0MDIxOOKApuKApuKApuKApi4u4oCmLjI5LjE5MDI4MTE5MDk0MTUNCg0KRklSU1QgT1JCSVQg KHdoZW4gVHJ1ZSBBbm9tYWx5IHYgY3Jvc3NlcyAwwrAsIDg3Ljk2OTIzNTQzNzMzIGRheXMgYWZ0 ZXIpDQpTYW1wbGXigKbigKbigKbigKbigKYuLuKApuKApi4uLi7igKYuLi4u4oCmLjM5MzDigKbi gKbigKbigKbigKbigKYuLuKApuKApuKApi4uLi4uLi4uLi4uLuKApi4zOTMxDQpKdWxpYW4gRGF0 ZeKApuKApuKApi7igKbigKbigKYuMjQ2MDI5OS4yMDgzMzMzM+KApuKApuKApi4uLuKApi4uLjI0 NjAyOTkuMjUwMDAwMDANCkNhbGVuZGFyIChUREIp4oCm4oCmLi7igKYuIEEuRC4gMjAyMy1EZWMt MjAgMTc6MDDigKbigKYuLiBBLkQuIDIwMjMtRGVjLTIwIDE4OjAwDQp2IMKwIChUcnVlIGFub21h bHkp4oCm4oCmLjM1OS45MTEzODg0MzY5OTjigKbigKbigKbigKYuLuKApi4wLjE3NTgzMzQ5OTQw ODQzMg0KUGVyaWFwc2lzIChLbSnigKYu4oCm4oCmLi4uNDYwMDExOTcuNjE0MzI5OOKApuKApuKA puKApi4u4oCmLjQ2MDAxMTk3LjYxNDI2NDENCmEgKEttKeKApuKApi4u4oCm4oCmLi4u4oCmLi4u 4oCmLjU3OTA5MTUyLjUxMTEwNTTigKbigKbigKbigKYuLuKApi41NzkwOTE1Mi4yODkwOTAyDQpl 4oCm4oCm4oCm4oCm4oCm4oCmLi4u4oCm4oCm4oCmLi4uLuKApi4wLjIwNTYzMTY1NTQ1MzYzNOKA puKApi4uLi4u4oCmLjAuMjA1NjMxNjUyNDA5Mjc4DQppICDCsOKApuKApuKApuKApuKApi7igKbi gKbigKbigKYuLi7igKYuNy4wMDM1ODM5MDE1MzUxN+KApi7igKYuLuKApuKApi4uLjcuMDAzNTgz ODkyMzMxODUNCs6pICDCsOKApi7igKbigKbigKYuLi7igKbigKbigKYuLi7igKYuNDguMzAwNzYx Mjg5MjUyMeKApuKApi4u4oCm4oCmLi4uNDguMzAwNzYxMjQ3MDA2OQ0Kz4kgIMKw4oCm4oCm4oCm 4oCm4oCm4oCmLuKApuKApi4uLuKApi4yOS4xOTE1OTE4MzIwMDQ44oCm4oCm4oCm4oCmLi7igKYu MjkuMTkxNTkxMjQyMzExNQ0KDQpTRUNPTkQgT1JCSVQgKHdoZW4gVHJ1ZSBBbm9tYWx5IHYgY3Jv c3NlcyAwwrAsIGFmdGVyIGFub3RoZXIgODcuOTY5MjM1NDM3MzMgZGF5cykNClNhbXBsZeKApuKA puKApuKApuKApi4u4oCm4oCmLi4uLuKApi4uLi4uLi4u4oCmLjYwNDHigKbigKbigKbigKbigKbi gKYuLuKApuKApuKApi4uLi4uLi7igKYuNjA0Mg0KSnVsaWFuIERhdGXigKbigKbigKYu4oCm4oCm 4oCmLjI0NjAzODcuMTY2NjY2NjbigKbigKbigKYuLi7igKYuLjI0NjAzODcuMjA4MzMzMzMNCkNh bGVuZGFyIChUREIp4oCm4oCmLi7igKYuIEEuRC4gMjAyNC1NYXItMTcgMTY6MDDigKbigKYuLiBB LkQuIDIwMjQtTWFyLTE3IDE3OjAwDQp2IMKwIChUcnVlIGFub21hbHkp4oCm4oCmLjM1OS44MzYw OTAzMDc5OTLigKbigKbigKbigKYuLuKApi4wLjEwMDU0Mjg2MDg4NDYwMg0KUGVyaWFwc2lzIChL bSnigKYu4oCm4oCmLi4uNDYwMDA0NjAuMzQ1ODk1MeKApuKApuKApuKApi4uLi4uNDYwMDA0NjAu MzQ1OTM4MQ0KYSAoS20p4oCm4oCmLi7igKbigKYuLi7igKYuLi7igKYuNTc5MDkwMTIuNTYwNzg4 NeKApuKApuKApuKApi4u4oCmLjU3OTA5MDEyLjQ1MzAzNQ0KZeKApuKApuKApuKApuKApuKApi4u LuKApuKApuKApi4uLi7igKYuMC4yMDU2NDI0NjcxNzg4ODHigKbigKYuLi4uLi4uLi4wLjIwNTY0 MjQ2NTcwMDA0OA0KaSAgwrDigKbigKbigKbigKbigKYu4oCm4oCm4oCm4oCmLi4u4oCmLjcuMDAz NTQ2NjI4NzYyOTjigKYu4oCmLi7igKYu4oCmLi43LjAwMzU0NjYyMzE4MTM0DQrOqSAgwrDigKYu 4oCm4oCm4oCmLi4u4oCm4oCm4oCmLi4u4oCmLjQ4LjMwMDUyODMxNTkzMDnigKbigKYuLuKApuKA pi4uLi40OC4zMDA1MjgyOTAzODU3DQrPiSAgwrDigKbigKbigKbigKbigKbigKYu4oCm4oCmLi4u 4oCmLjI5LjE5NDU3Mzc0NTQ0MDTigKbigKbigKbigKYuLi7igKYuMjkuMTk0NTczMjA0NDI0OQ0K DQoqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqKioqDQoNCkNBTENV TEFURSBUSEUgU0hJRlQgT0YgVEhFIFBFUklIRUxJT04gQkVUV0VFTiBUSEUgVFJBTlNJVElPTiBU TyBaRVJPIElOIFRXTyBDT05TRUNVVElWRSBPUkJJVFMuDQoNClRIRU4gQ09NUEFSRSBXSVRIIFRI RSBEQVRBIFRIQVQgSSBQT1NURUQgSEVSRToNCg0KaHR0cHM6Ly9ncm91cHMuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS9n L3NjaS5waHlzaWNzLnJlbGF0aXZpdHkvYy8yV0dGNkczaEIyYy9tLzZSYWItdUVHQkFBSg0KDQpD QU4gWU9VIERPIElUPw0KDQoNCg==

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul B. Andersen@21:1/5 to All on Mon Oct 9 22:42:08 2023
    Den 09.10.2023 01:19, skrev Richard Hertz:
    One proof that JPL Horizons online database provides PURE Kepler-Newton data;

    PERIHELION ADVANCE DURING THREE ORBITAL PERIODS IS PRACTICALLY ZERO ARCSECONDS.

    DATA:

    1) Mercury's orbital period: 87.96923544 days (average for 2,953 samples between 2023-Jul-10 00:00 and 2023-Nov-10 00:00)

    That is 123 days, so Mercury will pass perihelion maximum twice.
    That means that the perihelion advance can only be measured
    for one orbit.

    2) Mercury's perihelion advance per orbit: 0.0000734570 arcsec/orbit.

    The advance is measured for one particular orbit.
    And as a wise person like you will know, will the advance
    vary a lot from one orbit to the next.

    I have simulated the Solar System.
    The result for the perihelion advance of Mercury (the first 100 years):

    https://paulba.no/SolarSystem/AdvanceOfMercury.pdf

    You can see the advance for the first 24 orbits here:

    https://paulba.no/SolarSystem/FirstAdvance.pdf

    Note that the advance per orbit varies between +14.5" and -5.9,
    and among these 24 orbits the smallest advance is 0.6".
    So it isn't very remarkable that the advance may be very small
    for some orbits.

    The reason for the variation is that the pull from the other
    planets will vary a lot depending on the distance to them,
    particularly Venus and Jupiter.

    You can't fail to understand this if you think, or can you?


    3) GR prediction: 0.43 arcsec/year OR 0.103564055 arcsec/orbit.

    If Mercury and the Sun were the only two bodies in the universe,
    GR predicts that the perihelion advance of Mercury would be 42.98"/century.

    See:
    https://paulba.no/pdf/GRPerihelionAdvance.pdf https://paulba.no/PerihelionAdvance.html

    But both GR and NM predicts that the perihelion
    advance of Mercury caused by the pull from the other
    bodies (planets) in the solar system is 532.33"/century.

    So NM predicts that the perihelion advance of Mercury should be
    532.33"/century, while GR predicts 575.31"/centrury.

    I don't have to tell you which of them is in
    accordance with observations.


    As it can see, the value 2) (coming from NASA JPL Horizons database) implies that the shift of the perihelion/orbit is almost NULL.

    Good grief, Richard.
    Are you really so naive that you think that there
    is no advance of Mercury's perihelion? :-D

    Your ignorance never cease to amaze.

    https://paulba.no/SolarSystem/GRSolarSystem.pdf https://paulba.no/SolarSystem/GRSolarSystem.jar

    --
    Paul

    https://paulba.no/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Prokaryotic Capase Homolog@21:1/5 to Paul B. Andersen on Mon Oct 9 15:48:53 2023
    On Monday, October 9, 2023 at 3:41:27 PM UTC-5, Paul B. Andersen wrote:

    I have simulated the Solar System.
    The result for the perihelion advance of Mercury (the first 100 years):

    https://paulba.no/SolarSystem/AdvanceOfMercury.pdf

    You can see the advance for the first 24 orbits here:

    https://paulba.no/SolarSystem/FirstAdvance.pdf

    Note that the advance per orbit varies between +14.5" and -5.9,
    and among these 24 orbits the smallest advance is 0.6".
    So it isn't very remarkable that the advance may be very small
    for some orbits.

    The reason for the variation is that the pull from the other
    planets will vary a lot depending on the distance to them,
    particularly Venus and Jupiter.

    You can't fail to understand this if you think, or can you?

    It's rather remarkable what Richard can think.

    3) GR prediction: 0.43 arcsec/year OR 0.103564055 arcsec/orbit.
    If Mercury and the Sun were the only two bodies in the universe,
    GR predicts that the perihelion advance of Mercury would be 42.98"/century.

    See:
    https://paulba.no/pdf/GRPerihelionAdvance.pdf https://paulba.no/PerihelionAdvance.html

    But both GR and NM predicts that the perihelion
    advance of Mercury caused by the pull from the other
    bodies (planets) in the solar system is 532.33"/century.

    So NM predicts that the perihelion advance of Mercury should be 532.33"/century, while GR predicts 575.31"/centrury.

    I don't have to tell you which of them is in
    accordance with observations.

    As it can see, the value 2) (coming from NASA JPL Horizons database) implies that the shift of the perihelion/orbit is almost NULL.
    Good grief, Richard.
    Are you really so naive that you think that there
    is no advance of Mercury's perihelion? :-D

    Your ignorance never cease to amaze.

    https://paulba.no/SolarSystem/GRSolarSystem.pdf https://paulba.no/SolarSystem/GRSolarSystem.jar

    Richard appears to have been at one time a competent
    electrical engineer. What is is about retired electrical engineers
    that leads them to the loss of all the critical faculties that they
    must once upon a time have possessed?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to Prokaryotic Capase Homolog on Mon Oct 9 22:50:05 2023
    On Tuesday, 10 October 2023 at 00:48:55 UTC+2, Prokaryotic Capase Homolog wrote:
    On Monday, October 9, 2023 at 3:41:27 PM UTC-5, Paul B. Andersen wrote:

    I have simulated the Solar System.
    The result for the perihelion advance of Mercury (the first 100 years):

    https://paulba.no/SolarSystem/AdvanceOfMercury.pdf

    You can see the advance for the first 24 orbits here:

    https://paulba.no/SolarSystem/FirstAdvance.pdf

    Note that the advance per orbit varies between +14.5" and -5.9,
    and among these 24 orbits the smallest advance is 0.6".
    So it isn't very remarkable that the advance may be very small
    for some orbits.

    The reason for the variation is that the pull from the other
    planets will vary a lot depending on the distance to them,
    particularly Venus and Jupiter.

    You can't fail to understand this if you think, or can you?
    It's rather remarkable what Richard can think.
    3) GR prediction: 0.43 arcsec/year OR 0.103564055 arcsec/orbit.
    If Mercury and the Sun were the only two bodies in the universe,
    GR predicts that the perihelion advance of Mercury would be 42.98"/century.

    See:
    https://paulba.no/pdf/GRPerihelionAdvance.pdf https://paulba.no/PerihelionAdvance.html

    But both GR and NM predicts that the perihelion
    advance of Mercury caused by the pull from the other
    bodies (planets) in the solar system is 532.33"/century.

    So NM predicts that the perihelion advance of Mercury should be 532.33"/century, while GR predicts 575.31"/centrury.

    I don't have to tell you which of them is in
    accordance with observations.

    As it can see, the value 2) (coming from NASA JPL Horizons database) implies that the shift of the perihelion/orbit is almost NULL.
    Good grief, Richard.
    Are you really so naive that you think that there
    is no advance of Mercury's perihelion? :-D

    Your ignorance never cease to amaze.

    https://paulba.no/SolarSystem/GRSolarSystem.pdf https://paulba.no/SolarSystem/GRSolarSystem.jar
    Richard appears to have been at one time a competent
    electrical engineer. What is is about retired electrical engineers
    that leads them to the loss of all the critical faculties that they
    must once upon a time have possessed?

    Don't speak about "critical faculties", trash, The Shit
    of your idiot guru is rejecting common sense and
    basic [Euclidean] math, and wasn't even consistent.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)