Mercury Precession and GR maths

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by The God, May 31, 2016.

  1. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    This one is one of major passed tests for GR. Infact one of the early successes of GR. Is it ?

    http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research Papers-Astrophysics/Download/5901

    Some Extract from the paper..

    .......GR correction canceled out. Vancov [5] subsequently solved Einstein’s orbit
    equations with correction numerically and has shown that it gives unstable orbits for
    Mercury. For heavier bodies such as stars near the central black hole of a galaxy, it
    leads to orbits that become superluminal and do not ever reach the origin. It is thus
    proven that Einstein’s Mercury correction is completely false, and fails for planets as well as black holes!........

    By Roger A. Rydin.....He is a mainstream guy. Anyway I am sure, Rpenner, can surely see the maths involved. I have heard about one more paper by a Chinese guy, who found certain issues with Einstein's integration on this, I will look around and if find, I will link that too.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Daecon Kiwi fruit Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,133
    If you say so.

    I think the rest of us would prefer to hear from someone who is actually qualified in this field.
     
    exchemist likes this.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    I have said nothing so far in this OP. I just posted a link with some relevant extract, did you go through that paper ? And please speak for yourself, no 'rest of us', you should say,.... I would prefer.......Or let me know if you represent some guys here.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,703
    * There are cranks that even pretend to be in mainstream circles.
    * The otherwise great astronomer Fred Hoyle was a "Steady State"proponent despite all evidence pointing to the BB.
    * There are many would be's if they could be's that are also just average physicists and will seek whatever fame and/or notoriety they can do try and gain a recognised foothold in the scientific academia.
    * This paper, along with the many other anti GR papers, and maverick hypotheticals, will languish forever never really making any difference and with no citations.
    * Not sure of the publishing Co either.
    This Roger A. Rydin is no probably one or all of the above.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Just another ho hum effort.
     
  8. Farsight

    Messages:
    3,492
    Check out the Gerber controversy :

     
  9. Farsight

    Messages:
    3,492
    Doublepost deleted.
     
  10. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    If you catch hold of that chinese guy paper, in which he has given the exact intergartion, without doing approximation, then please post. I am not able to recall anything, not even his name.
     
  11. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    Whatever said and done Gerber warranted a reference in Einstein paper, Eisntein's boastful statement later that even if he knew about Gerber work, then also there was no need for him to mention him, is sad to say the least.
     
  12. rpenner Fully Wired Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,833
    The "journal" is trash, publishing many things that would not ordinarily pass editorial review, let alone peer review. It is not a scientific journal of good reputation.

    The paper is trash. It's based on a mistaken explanation of GR by Vankov in the same "journal". Where it makes mathematical claims, there is no math. Where it makes factual claims, there is no traceability. It compares the apples of GR's perihelion shift with the oranges of JPL's estimate of Mercury's actual orbit which changes shape and perihelion due to all causes, including perturbation by other planets not part of the GR discussion.

    The references are antique, same-author-same-journal or Vankov who in turn relies on this author for translations.

    So if you want to learn GR, learn the mathematical prerequisites, open some textbooks and do the math.
     
    exchemist likes this.
  13. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,450
    If The God spent his time trying to learning physics instead of spending his time chasing cranks to troll physics sites he might actually learns some real physics. What a monumental waste of time and effort.
     
    Russ_Watters, exchemist and paddoboy like this.
  14. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    Journal is trash and paper is also trash !
    So let us not get into journal being trash, now the question is how the paper is trash ?
    The author has certain credentials, may be at par with you, may not be at par with you, but can you dismiss him with just an unsubstantiated statement ? Please highlight what is trash about paper...that will be all.
     
  15. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,703
    One Swallow, does not a Summer make.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Keep searching though.....There is always a non zero chance you may in time discover something invalidating GR and 21st century cosmology. [Although that non zero chance is far closer to zero than to one.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  16. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    Hua Di....
    Who was a research scholar at Stanford, has given simple maths for mercury perihelion calculations. pdf is not attaching, I will try again.

    I am very confident Rpenner will be able to appreciate the issue with integration involved in Einstein Solution. He proves that exact calculations yield 75 or 100, not 43" per 100 years, as claimed by Einstein.......
     
  17. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    Yes it does...You do not know Karl Popper. Read about his work, understand that.
     
  18. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,703

    Wow!!!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Even rajesh had better English comprehension than that.
    I repeat.....
    .....There is always a non zero chance you may in time discover something invalidating GR and 21st century cosmology. [Although that non zero chance is far closer to zero than to one.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    I will also add that perhaps you need to go back to basics and understand that any scientific theory must be able to be falsifiable.
    The last time I checked [yesterday] GR was still standing as near certain and unchallenged at this time, at least by people that know what they are talking about.
    Again, One swallow does not a Summer make.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  19. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    The paper as attached by Hua Di, is quite straightforward and simple.
    Is there any problem with his integration ?
     

    Attached Files:

  20. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,703
    One Swallow, two Swallows, even if accompanied by the god, Farsight and our other less than credible anti science brigade, still does not a Summer make.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Looked again this morning, and everything is still honky dory with GR!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!





    Heck! I just noticed, it's been shifted to pseudoscience!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  21. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    Instead of making irrelevant noise, please try to comment on the paper.....
     
  22. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,703
    I'm not really competent enough to critique the paper, just as I'm sure you are not.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  23. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,703
    The abstract alone is enough to set the alarm bells ringing with regards to the credibility of this bloke, the credibility of the publisher and whether it has or has not been properly reviewed.
    Keep trying though matey!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     

Share This Page