Psychotic Humpty Roberts places foot in mouth (again).

"Dirk Van de moortel" wrote in message news:...

"Randy Poe" wrote in message ups.com...
On Apr 29, 10:53 am, "Androcles"
wrote:
"Nonsense. GR obtains essentially the same answer as Newtonian mechanics
for this physical situation. The difference is far below measurement
accuracy." -- Humpty Roberts
)

For the advance of perihelion of Mercury, predicted
by Newtonian Mechanics to within 43 arc seconds per century
(= 415 orbits) which is

415 orbits * 360 degrees = 149400 degrees
149400 degrees * 60 arc minutes = 8964000 arc minutes
8964000 arc minutes * 60 arc seconds = 537840000 arc seconds.

43
-------------------------------- x 100 = 0.00000799494273389855719%
537840000

The difference is far below ANY measurement accuracy.
Einstein with his 4-figure log tables and 3-figure sliderule
could not be that accurate and was not an astronomer.

I am very excited to announce I just located an online copy
of the 1859 article in which Urbain le Verrier first famously
announced that observations of Mercury were not consistent
with Newtonian predictions. The paper is called "Theorie
du Mouvement de Mercure", is in French, and is some 195
pages long. I am looking for the part dealing with observational
accuracy right now, but I am a slow reader in French and it
will take a while to locate.

Can you post the pointer to the online copy please?
TIA!

Nver mind :-)
Got it with google
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Th...de+Mercure%22+
First hit:
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1859AnPar...5....1L
Takes a while to download: 17.6 Mb

Dirk Vdm

Dirk Vdm

On May 3, 2:48 pm, "Dirk Van de moortel" dirkvandemoor...@ThankS-NO-
SperM.hotmail.com wrote:
"Dirk Van de moortel" wrote in message news:...





"Randy Poe" wrote in oglegroups.com...
On Apr 29, 10:53 am, "Androcles"
wrote:
"Nonsense. GR obtains essentially the same answer as Newtonian mechanics
for this physical situation. The difference is far below measurement
accuracy." -- Humpty Roberts
)

For the advance of perihelion of Mercury, predicted
by Newtonian Mechanics to within 43 arc seconds per century
(= 415 orbits) which is

415 orbits * 360 degrees = 149400 degrees
149400 degrees * 60 arc minutes = 8964000 arc minutes
8964000 arc minutes * 60 arc seconds = 537840000 arc seconds.

43
-------------------------------- x 100 = 0.00000799494273389855719%
537840000

The difference is far below ANY measurement accuracy.
Einstein with his 4-figure log tables and 3-figure sliderule
could not be that accurate and was not an astronomer.

I am very excited to announce I just located an online copy
of the 1859 article in which Urbain le Verrier first famously
announced that observations of Mercury were not consistent
with Newtonian predictions. The paper is called "Theorie
du Mouvement de Mercure", is in French, and is some 195
pages long. I am looking for the part dealing with observational
accuracy right now, but I am a slow reader in French and it
will take a while to locate.

Can you post the pointer to the online copy please?
TIA!

Nver mind :-)
Got it with google
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Th...de+Mercure%22+
First hit:
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1859AnPar...5....1L
Takes a while to download: 17.6 Mb

Scanning the first section, where he discusses the history
of Mercury observations and just how
difficult it is to get accurate observations of Mercury since
it is always so close to the sun. I admire even more these
guys who were able to overcome this kind of difficulty and
get these amazing accuracies.

The actual perturbation theory appears to be elsewhe
"Nous avons, dans le Chapitre XIV (Tome IV, page 3)
donné une idée précise de la methode qui a été
employée dans le calcul des perturbations..."

Chapter XIV is available:
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1858AnPar...4....1L

But it in turn refers back to formulas in earlier chapters.
This is a monumental work and it's going to take some
digging. Fascinating research, though. I'm going to enjoy
this.

- Randy

"Randy Poe" wrote in message oups.com...
On May 3, 2:48 pm, "Dirk Van de moortel" dirkvandemoor...@ThankS-NO-
SperM.hotmail.com wrote:

[snip]

Got it with google
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Th...de+Mercure%22+
First hit:
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1859AnPar...5....1L
Takes a while to download: 17.6 Mb

Scanning the first section, where he discusses the history
of Mercury observations and just how
difficult it is to get accurate observations of Mercury since
it is always so close to the sun. I admire even more these
guys who were able to overcome this kind of difficulty and
get these amazing accuracies.

First section is a pleasant read.


The actual perturbation theory appears to be elsewhe
"Nous avons, dans le Chapitre XIV (Tome IV, page 3)
donné une idée précise de la methode qui a été
employée dans le calcul des perturbations..."

Chapter XIV is available:
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1858AnPar...4....1L

But it in turn refers back to formulas in earlier chapters.
This is a monumental work and it's going to take some
digging. Fascinating research, though. I'm going to enjoy
this.

Some digging indeed. Call it a project.
Enjoy :-)

Dirk Vdm