REASONS RELATIVISTS GIVE FOR DOUBLED DEFLECTION OF NEWTON'S:

1. Newton's plus curved space.
2. Gravity plus gravitational potential.
3. 2 spin photons.
4.

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

Doubling Newtonan affect of gravity for light violates Galileo's finding
that all masses are affected the same and Eotvos finding that all
materials are affected the same. This has never been justified by
relativity and cannot be. It is extremely ad hoc.

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

W dniu 30.06.2024 o 11:45, Mikko pisze:

On 2024-06-29 13:43:05 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

REASONS RELATIVISTS GIVE FOR DOUBLED DEFLECTION OF NEWTON'S:

1. Newton's plus curved space.
2. Gravity plus gravitational potential.
3. 2 spin photons.
4.

4. Newton's prediction is half of the correct value.

Let's add - Newton's prediction in his optics.
A relativistic piece of shit, of course, doesn't
care that Newton's optics was abandoned in 18th
century.

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

On 2024-06-29 13:43:05 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

REASONS RELATIVISTS GIVE FOR DOUBLED DEFLECTION OF NEWTON'S:

1. Newton's plus curved space.
2. Gravity plus gravitational potential.
3. 2 spin photons.
4.

4. Newton's prediction is half of the correct value.

--
Mikko

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

Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> wrote:

On 2024-06-29 13:43:05 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

REASONS RELATIVISTS GIVE FOR DOUBLED DEFLECTION OF NEWTON'S:

Don't reason, solve the equations.

1. Newton's plus curved space.
2. Gravity plus gravitational potential.
3. 2 spin photons.
4.

4. Newton's prediction is half of the correct value.

And it was a completely ad-hoc 'prediction' to begin with.
(and Newton never even thought of it)

Using Huygens instead, one would have predicted a zero deflection.
There just wasn't any meaningful connection between light and gravity
until Einstein formulated the equivalence principle,

Jan

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

What kind of a mathematician does the math without knowing the reasons?
A crooked bookie.
The equivalence principle is facile nonsense.
Light is not affected by gravity.

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

W dniu 30.06.2024 o 22:15, J. J. Lodder pisze:

Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> wrote:

On 2024-06-29 13:43:05 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

REASONS RELATIVISTS GIVE FOR DOUBLED DEFLECTION OF NEWTON'S:

Don't reason, solve the equations.

1. Newton's plus curved space.
2. Gravity plus gravitational potential.
3. 2 spin photons.
4.

4. Newton's prediction is half of the correct value.

And it was a completely ad-hoc 'prediction' to begin with.
(and Newton never even thought of it)

Using Huygens instead, one would have predicted a zero deflection.
There just wasn't any meaningful connection between light and gravity

A lie, of course, as expected from
relativistic scum. Any lie to conclude
"Evil Newton falsified!!!!!!!!!!"
Using Huygens one would predict nothing.
There just wasn't any meaningful connection
between light and gravity.

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

Den 30.06.2024 23:42, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen:

Light is not affected by gravity.

https://paulba.no/paper/PPN_gamma_Hipparcos.pdf https://paulba.no/paper/PPN_gamma_Cassini.pdf https://paulba.no/paper/GravDeflection.pdf
https://paulba.no/paper/Fomalont.pdf https://paulba.no/paper/PPN_gamma_Cassini_2.pdf

There is no way you can claim to be ignorant of
the fact that light is deflected when it passes
massive objects like stars.

Don't you understand how stupid it is to claim what
is proved false?


--
Paul

https://paulba.no/

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

LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

What kind of a mathematician does the math without knowing the reasons?

All of them.
If they care about reasons they are mathematical physicists,

Jan

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

LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

The equivalence principle is facile nonsense.
Light is not affected by gravity.

That is precisely what the equivalence principle says,
(among oher things)

Jan

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