 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Natural Science Forum / Physics / General Physics / July 2008Precession of the Perihelion of Mercury
Lets all think outside the box like we should have always done but for some reason Einstein dingleberries don't want to look outside the box at all. so.. Add the Keplarian motion of the Sun, and of course, the Keplarian motion of the Galaxy, and remove the stupid a.s relativistic changes to length and clock rate. and TADA! Guess what? :) Have fun! :) I am going to ignore the stubborn mule type rubber ruler comments on this as much as possible. Hopefully some other types of self thinking physicists are still reading here. :)  SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman > Lets all think outside the box like we should have always done > but for some reason Einstein dingleberries don't want [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > and TADA! > Guess what? You're left with an unaccounted for extra motion of the direction of perihelion. That news is over 100 years old. >> Lets all think outside the box like we should have always done >> but for some reason Einstein dingleberries don't want [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > of the direction of perihelion. That news is > over 100 years old. Extra motion of the direction from what? Are you sure you are including all of the outside the box facts? Or are you still only thinking inside the solar system box still like such was thought of 100 yrs ago. :) SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman >>> Lets all think outside the box like we should have always done >>> but for some reason Einstein dingleberries don't want [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Extra motion of the direction from what? Why do you start a thread if you don't know what the terms are that you used in the topic subject? > Are you sure you are including all of the outside the box > facts? James, the people who were working on the problem at the turn of the previous century were not the idiots you take them to be. They took everything into account that they could think of, even going so far as to postulate the existence of extra solar system bodies orbiting near the Sun (ex. Vulcan) to account for the measured discrepancy. Nothing within the bounds of Newtonian mechanics could be found to reconcile the observed versus predicted values. Nothing outside the solar system could have that effect either, since it would also have to effect the other planets to a much larger degree. > Or are you still only thinking inside the solar system box > still like such was thought of 100 yrs ago. James, it would be a major step forward if you could even *find* the box. >>>> Lets all think outside the box like we should have always done >>>> but for some reason Einstein dingleberries don't want [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Why do you start a thread if you don't know what the > terms are that you used in the topic subject? I am simply asking you to provide what motion is occuring that is not accounted for. I see you can't provide such. Thanks for your "non proof" of such a motion. > James, the people who were working on the problem at > the turn of the previous century were not the idiots > you take them to be. Greg, Those idiots did not even know there were other Galaxies nevermind the motion of Our galaxy in the universe also. So Stop being such a fool. <snipped rest of 100 yr old babble> Greg is now one of the rubber ruler people. Bye Greg. Still stuck in the box I see. :) SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman >>>>> Lets all think outside the box like we should have always done >>>>> but for some reason Einstein dingleberries don't want [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > I see you can't provide such. > Thanks for your "non proof" of such a motion. I could, but then that would deprive you of the pleasure of looking it up yourself. Google is your friend. >> James, the people who were working on the problem at >> the turn of the previous century were not the idiots [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Those idiots did not even know there were other Galaxies > nevermind the motion of Our galaxy in the universe also. They certainly knew enough to realize that there were no external influences that could produce the perihelion advance of Mercury and leave the other planets' orbits undisturbed. The mathematics of orbit determination and precision observations dates back centuries before Hubble. > So > Stop being such a fool. > <snipped rest of 100 yr old babble> Ignorance is not a way of knowing things, James. On Jul 7, 4:16 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > Lets all think outside the box like we should have always done > but for some reason Einstein dingleberries don't want [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman My grade school teachers admonished me: "Always show your work." Einstein showed his work. We know how he got his numbers. Where are your numbers? How did you get them? Tom Davidson Richmond, VA On Jul 7, 4:16 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > Lets all think outside the box like we should have always done > but for some reason Einstein dingleberries don't want [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman My grade school teachers admonished me: "Always show your work." Einstein showed his work. We know how he got his numbers. ======================================== Are you sure about that? Einstein showed how he masked Le Verrier's oversight, magnified the noise of a small rounding error and claimed it proved his crackpot theory. ======================================== Where are your numbers? How did you get them? ========================================= Good point. Where are yours? > My grade school teachers admonished me: "Always show your work." > Einstein showed his work. We know how he got his numbers. Indeed. From Poincarré's notebook. SignatureFlorian "Toute vérité franchit trois étapes. D'abord elle est ridiculisée. Ensuite, elle subit une forte opposition. Puis, elle est considérée comme ayant toujours été une évidence." - Arthur Schopenhauer > My grade school teachers admonished me: "Always show your work." > Einstein showed his work. We know how he got his numbers. > Where are your numbers? How did you get them? My dog ate my universal motion calculator and I had all the numbers stored in the memory function slots. Sorry. :) Maybe you could do the math and see what happens. But remember, use absolute time and absolute distances (or as close to possible) so it will not have multiple standards for measurements. :) SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 7, 3:16 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > Lets all think outside the box like we should have always done > but for some reason Einstein dingleberries don't want [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > reading here. > :) So let's see. You're inviting everyone to think of *other* reasons why the perihelion of Mercury would precess the way it does, motivated by your desire to see relativity tossed aside. You have no ideas for what those other reasons might be, and so you have nothing to offer other than being a cheerleader for anyone that will give it a go. Ooooh. THAT'S motivational. > -- > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > So let's see. You're inviting everyone to think of *other* reasons why > the perihelion of Mercury would precess the way it does, motivated by > your desire to see relativity tossed aside. No, I am simply inviting people to check "outside the box" as far as possible. Do you know when you check outside the box, you actually find out what the box is doing? And ofcourse, if you wish to be sure, you need to look for the bigger box to see what it is also doing. If you never look, you are stuck inside the box just like you are. :) SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 8, 10:44 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > So let's see. You're inviting everyone to think of *other* reasons why > > the perihelion of Mercury would precess the way it does, motivated by [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I am simply inviting people to check "outside the box" > as far as possible. And what do you think will be found? A stranger walks up to the entrance of a working gold mine just as two miners are walking out for their lunch break. "Y'all are digging in the wrong place," the stranger says casually. "What?" says one of the miners. "Y'all should be digging over there, on the other side of the hill." "Why should we dig over there?" "Because where you're digging, you have to work too hard to get gold. And your shovels are all bent anyway. It's obvious y'all are digging in the wrong spot." "Have you dug over there where you say we should go?" "No," said the stranger. "Do you have any evidence at all that there's any gold over there?" "No," says the stranger, "But does that mean you shouldn't try over there?" "Because you say so?" asks the other miner, his eyebrows up under his hard hat. "Not because I say so, but because it's obvious there's gold over there. Thousands of years of basic math says there's gold over there!" exclaims the stranger. "Tell you what, pal," says the miner, "let us eat our lunch and get back to work. If you want to try your hand at mining, come back in the morning with some rough clothes and we'll get the foreman to put a shovel in your hands." "No thanks," says the stranger, "I'm happy just telling you you're digging in the wrong place." > Do you know when you check outside the box, you > actually find out what the box is doing? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > On Jul 8, 10:44 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > And what do you think will be found? Something you will never get because your brain will probably snap if you even tried it at all. It would be called a physical "cause" for an effect moron! SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 9, 8:40 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > On Jul 8, 10:44 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > will probably snap if you even tried it at all. > It would be called a physical "cause" for an effect moron! Such as...? You might as well be inviting me to look for the Fountain of Youth. Sounds righteous, but doesn't mean you've got any ideas. PD On Jul 7, 4:16 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > Lets all think outside the box like we should have always done > but for some reason Einstein dingleberries don't want [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman Maybe you could explain to us how wooden or metal rulers get smaller as they move away from you. No rubber involved. > On Jul 7, 4:16 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > Maybe you could explain to us how wooden or metal rulers get smaller > as they move away from you. No rubber involved. Optical illusion of distance and the way lightwaves work. You see, when something move away from you, less lightwaves from it can hit your eyes. Do you actually think the rulers get "physically smaller" :) SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 8, 10:49 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > On Jul 7, 4:16 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > You see, when something move away from you, less > lightwaves from it can hit your eyes. Oooh, I LOVE this. Tell us more. So if it moves from left to right PAST us at high speed and it is measured smaller, how does that happen? > Do you actually think the rulers get "physically smaller" > :) > > -- > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > On Jul 8, 10:49 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > So if it moves from left to right PAST us at high speed and it is > measured smaller, how does that happen? Read above, think harder. Oh wait.. you can't do that huh? Poor thing. LOL SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 9, 8:41 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > On Jul 8, 10:49 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > Read above, think harder. It's your idea. YOU explain it. Oh wait... you can't do that huh? Poor thing. PD Whoops, almost forgot: LOL :) > Oh wait.. you can't do that huh? > Poor thing. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.