FR Bending of Light -- Proof

Phil Bouchard wrote:

eric gisse wrote:

So Phil, how many copies of your book have you sold to people that are
not related to you?

To many Ph.Ds except relativists.

Nice to see your bias against those who have learned what you can not
continues unabated.

Sam Wormley wrote:

You aren't fooling anybody, Phil. What a crock!

The only ones who think I'm attempting fooling them are the fooled.

Phil Bouchard wrote:

By using the exact mathematical formulation of FR on the bending of
light, we find the same angle that was observed in the 1919 Eddington
eclipse experiment or 1.75 ". The mathematical proof is shown in the
following book:
[snip crap]

1) 40 years of solar grazing incidence quasar displacement studies.
2) 20 years of astronomic Einstein rings and gravitational lensing.
3) idiot

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm

"Phil Bouchard" wrote in message
...
Androcles wrote:

Any good detective can discover the source of his sci-fi.
'Really, this is what is meant by the Fourth Dimension, though some
people who talk about the Fourth Dimension do not know they mean it. It
is only another way of looking at Time. There is no difference between
Time and any of the three dimensions of Space except that our
consciousness moves along with it.' -- Herbert George Wells - "The Time
Machine" - 1895 (when Albert ****wit Einstein was 16 years old).

"In 1927,

Oops, I snipped part of your reply.
What were you mumbling?

eric gisse wrote:

Nice to see your bias against those who have learned what you can not
continues unabated.

Excuses, excuses, ...

Uncle Al wrote:

1) 40 years of solar grazing incidence quasar displacement studies.
2) 20 years of astronomic Einstein rings and gravitational lensing.
3) idiot

Right, but the only problem is you cannot disprove FR.

Phil Bouchard wrote:

Uncle Al wrote:

1) 40 years of solar grazing incidence quasar displacement studies.
2) 20 years of astronomic Einstein rings and gravitational lensing.
3) idiot

Right, but the only problem is you cannot disprove FR.

idiot

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm

Phil Bouchard wrote:

Uncle Al wrote:

1) 40 years of solar grazing incidence quasar displacement studies.
2) 20 years of astronomic Einstein rings and gravitational lensing.
3) idiot

Right, but the only problem is you cannot disprove FR.

Theories that do not make definitive predictions cannot be, by their very
nature, disproved.

Phil Bouchard wrote:

eric gisse wrote:

Nice to see your bias against those who have learned what you can not
continues unabated.

Excuses, excuses, ...

I don't need to resort to passive aggressive abuses of language to make my
point known. I have literature references - and actual aggression.

Look Phil, it is clear that you either need more attention or forgot that
people hate you here. Either way, you'll get abused until you once again
pack up and leave for a few months when you'll start the cycle anew.

eric gisse wrote:

I don't need to resort to passive aggressive abuses of language to make my
point known. I have literature references - and actual aggression.

Look Phil, it is clear that you either need more attention or forgot that
people hate you here. Either way, you'll get abused until you once again
pack up and leave for a few months when you'll start the cycle anew.

I can't help people who don't want to help themselves so just speak for
yourself in any event.

This is a physics newsgroups and I am expecting comments from those who
are willing to learn.