A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Others » Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The Advance of the Perihelion of Mercury



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 21st 08, 09:04 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Double-A[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,720
Default The Advance of the Perihelion of Mercury

From the book "The Riddle of Gravity" by Einstein's colleague at
Princeton, Peter G. Bergmann:

"The advance of the perihelion of Mercury was considered a settled
matter in 1915 when Einstein derived from hs thoery ... "

"The excellence of this zgreement has been called into question by
Dicke" (Robert H. Dicke of Princeton).

"According to Dicke, the scaler-tensor theory leads to a slightly
different rate of perihelion advance than Einstein's original theory,
the difference amounting to about one tenth of Einstein's value."

WHOOPS!

The book goes on to say that possible oblateness of the Sun might be
responsible for part of Mercury's perihelion advance. Studies have
been done, but with no conclusiive results.

This just goes to show that nothing is nailed down, as the textbook
bangers would say.

I still like to pin my hopes on the exixtence of Vulcan as a partial
explanation. There is no one better poised to discover Vulcan than
David Tholen in his current survey of objects inside of Mercury's
orbit. He might be the first in 100 years to view Vulcan as it comes
out of the glare of the Sun! And that will prove it is not an
invisible planet as the astrologers claim. (Though it would be
interesting if they were right and it turns out to be a dark matter
planet!)

Live long and prosper, Dave!

Double-A

Ads
  #2  
Old May 28th 08, 07:38 AM posted to alt.astronomy
Painius[_1_] Painius[_1_] is offline
Banned
 
First recorded activity by SpaceBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,659
Default The Advance of the Perihelion of Mercury

"Double-A" wrote in message...
...

From the book "The Riddle of Gravity" by Einstein's colleague at
Princeton, Peter G. Bergmann:

"The advance of the perihelion of Mercury was considered a settled
matter in 1915 when Einstein derived from hs thoery ... "

"The excellence of this zgreement has been called into question by
Dicke" (Robert H. Dicke of Princeton).

"According to Dicke, the scaler-tensor theory leads to a slightly
different rate of perihelion advance than Einstein's original theory,
the difference amounting to about one tenth of Einstein's value."

WHOOPS!

The book goes on to say that possible oblateness of the Sun might be
responsible for part of Mercury's perihelion advance. Studies have
been done, but with no conclusiive results.

This just goes to show that nothing is nailed down, as the textbook
bangers would say.

I still like to pin my hopes on the exixtence of Vulcan as a partial
explanation. There is no one better poised to discover Vulcan than
David Tholen in his current survey of objects inside of Mercury's
orbit. He might be the first in 100 years to view Vulcan as it comes
out of the glare of the Sun! And that will prove it is not an
invisible planet as the astrologers claim. (Though it would be
interesting if they were right and it turns out to be a dark matter
planet!)

Live long and prosper, Dave!

Double-A


This is an example of experimenters experiencing a larger
window of tolerance than hoped for, and yet still accepting
the 10% as "close enough" to substantiate the theory. I
myself think this is acceptable. Einstein did not hit a home
run in several parameters of several experiments. But
where Newton got to second base, Einstein effectively made
it to third!

And Dicke himself, while striving to disprove Einstein's work,
gave experimental relativity sufficient credibility so as to do
the reverse. And modern experiments have decreased those
larger windows of tolerance giving more and more credence
to GR.

As for Vulcan? DA, you just might be pinning your hopes to
a pipe dream. Don't you think that the position of Vulcan
based on its possible influence upon Mercury has been being
followed precisely ever since the mid 50's when Dicke started
raising hell? And alas, no physical planet has yet to show up
in that mythical planetary orbit within the orbit of Mercury.
Don't you think it would have been found many years ago if
it does indeed exist?

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine

P.S. Thank YOU for reading!

P.P.S. Some secret sites (shh)...
http://painellsworth.net
http://savethechildren.org
http://eBook-eDen.secretsgolden.com


  #3  
Old May 28th 08, 01:23 PM posted to alt.astronomy
oldcoot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,357
Default The Advance of the Perihelion of Mercury

On May 27, 11:38*pm, "Painius" wrote:

This is an example of experimenters experiencing a larger
window of tolerance than hoped for, and yet still accepting
the 10% as "close enough" to substantiate the theory. *
.....And modern experiments have decreased those
larger windows of tolerance giving more and more credence
to GR.

But still a niggling little discrepancy remains. It's been mentioned
before that since Mercury resides 'waay deep in the Sun's gravity
well, its situation is the inverse of the Pioneer anomaly from 'waay
out at the fringes of the Sun's gravity well. Just as researchers are
failing to factor in the density gradient (or PDT gradient) of space
in the Pioneer anomaly, the same situation exists with Mercury, but in
reverse.
  #4  
Old June 8th 08, 06:46 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Saul Levy Saul Levy is offline
Banned
 
First recorded activity by SpaceBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 21,291
Default The Advance of the Perihelion of Mercury

Vulcan, like Wormwood, doesn't exist, Paine and DA.

No planet can hide BEHIND the Sun. It will be seen at times, yet has
never been seen.

Tholen is wasting his time. Astronomers who waste time in that way
are declared NUTJOBS!

Astrologers LOVE invisible planets! It's there, you just can't see
it! Nothing hides from IR detectors.

BAWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Saul Levy


On Wed, 28 May 2008 06:38:59 GMT, "Painius"
wrote:

"Double-A" wrote in message...
...

From the book "The Riddle of Gravity" by Einstein's colleague at
Princeton, Peter G. Bergmann:

"The advance of the perihelion of Mercury was considered a settled
matter in 1915 when Einstein derived from hs thoery ... "

"The excellence of this zgreement has been called into question by
Dicke" (Robert H. Dicke of Princeton).

"According to Dicke, the scaler-tensor theory leads to a slightly
different rate of perihelion advance than Einstein's original theory,
the difference amounting to about one tenth of Einstein's value."

WHOOPS!

The book goes on to say that possible oblateness of the Sun might be
responsible for part of Mercury's perihelion advance. Studies have
been done, but with no conclusiive results.

This just goes to show that nothing is nailed down, as the textbook
bangers would say.

I still like to pin my hopes on the exixtence of Vulcan as a partial
explanation. There is no one better poised to discover Vulcan than
David Tholen in his current survey of objects inside of Mercury's
orbit. He might be the first in 100 years to view Vulcan as it comes
out of the glare of the Sun! And that will prove it is not an
invisible planet as the astrologers claim. (Though it would be
interesting if they were right and it turns out to be a dark matter
planet!)

Live long and prosper, Dave!

Double-A


This is an example of experimenters experiencing a larger
window of tolerance than hoped for, and yet still accepting
the 10% as "close enough" to substantiate the theory. I
myself think this is acceptable. Einstein did not hit a home
run in several parameters of several experiments. But
where Newton got to second base, Einstein effectively made
it to third!

And Dicke himself, while striving to disprove Einstein's work,
gave experimental relativity sufficient credibility so as to do
the reverse. And modern experiments have decreased those
larger windows of tolerance giving more and more credence
to GR.

As for Vulcan? DA, you just might be pinning your hopes to
a pipe dream. Don't you think that the position of Vulcan
based on its possible influence upon Mercury has been being
followed precisely ever since the mid 50's when Dicke started
raising hell? And alas, no physical planet has yet to show up
in that mythical planetary orbit within the orbit of Mercury.
Don't you think it would have been found many years ago if
it does indeed exist?

  #5  
Old June 9th 08, 06:53 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Painius Painius is offline
Banned
 
First recorded activity by SpaceBanter: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,144
Default The Advance of the Perihelion of Mercury

"Saul Levy" wrote in message...
...
On Wed, 28 May 2008 06:38:59 GMT, "Painius"
wrote:
"Double-A" wrote in message...
...

From the book "The Riddle of Gravity" by Einstein's colleague at
Princeton, Peter G. Bergmann:

"The advance of the perihelion of Mercury was considered a settled
matter in 1915 when Einstein derived from hs thoery ... "

"The excellence of this zgreement has been called into question by
Dicke" (Robert H. Dicke of Princeton).

"According to Dicke, the scaler-tensor theory leads to a slightly
different rate of perihelion advance than Einstein's original theory,
the difference amounting to about one tenth of Einstein's value."

WHOOPS!

The book goes on to say that possible oblateness of the Sun might be
responsible for part of Mercury's perihelion advance. Studies have
been done, but with no conclusiive results.

This just goes to show that nothing is nailed down, as the textbook
bangers would say.

I still like to pin my hopes on the exixtence of Vulcan as a partial
explanation. There is no one better poised to discover Vulcan than
David Tholen in his current survey of objects inside of Mercury's
orbit. He might be the first in 100 years to view Vulcan as it comes
out of the glare of the Sun! And that will prove it is not an
invisible planet as the astrologers claim. (Though it would be
interesting if they were right and it turns out to be a dark matter
planet!)

Live long and prosper, Dave!

Double-A


This is an example of experimenters experiencing a larger
window of tolerance than hoped for, and yet still accepting
the 10% as "close enough" to substantiate the theory. I
myself think this is acceptable. Einstein did not hit a home
run in several parameters of several experiments. But
where Newton got to second base, Einstein effectively made
it to third!

And Dicke himself, while striving to disprove Einstein's work,
gave experimental relativity sufficient credibility so as to do
the reverse. And modern experiments have decreased those
larger windows of tolerance giving more and more credence
to GR.

As for Vulcan? DA, you just might be pinning your hopes to
a pipe dream. Don't you think that the position of Vulcan
based on its possible influence upon Mercury has been being
followed precisely ever since the mid 50's when Dicke started
raising hell? And alas, no physical planet has yet to show up
in that mythical planetary orbit within the orbit of Mercury.
Don't you think it would have been found many years ago if
it does indeed exist?


Vulcan, like Wormwood, doesn't exist, Paine and DA.

No planet can hide BEHIND the Sun. It will be seen at times, yet has
never been seen.

Tholen is wasting his time. Astronomers who waste time in that way
are declared NUTJOBS!

Astrologers LOVE invisible planets! It's there, you just can't see
it! Nothing hides from IR detectors.

BAWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Saul Levy


That's what i said, Saul, Vulcan can't exist or it would
have been discovered by now. As for no planet hiding
behind the Sun, Venus, Mercury, heck, several planets
sometimes hide behind the Sun.

You seem to be thinking of, not Vulcan, which was
supposed to be going around the Sun in its own orbit
just like the rest of the planets, but only nearer to the
Sun than Mercury, instead you appear to be thinking
a modern version of the "Counter Earth", also called
"Antichthon". The modern version would be a planet
that lies in the exact same orbit as Earth, but on the
opposite side of the Sun. Planet Krypton of Superman
fame was also orbiting on the other side of the Sun in
Earth's precise orbit before it was destroyed.

The thing that does it for me is knowing just how exact
and precise the measurements must be when planning
an excursion to the Moon or Mars. The Phoenix, for
example, would have missed Mars by a country light-
hour if there were a planet Vulcan, simply because the
scientists who plotted Phoenix's path from Earth to
Mars did not allow for the gravitational effects of a
planet Vulcan!

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine

P.S. Thank YOU for reading!

P.P.S. Some secret sites (shh)...
http://painellsworth.net
http://savethechildren.org
http://eBook-eDen.secretsgolden.com



  #6  
Old June 10th 08, 12:41 AM posted to alt.astronomy
Saul Levy Saul Levy is offline
Banned
 
First recorded activity by SpaceBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 21,291
Default The Advance of the Perihelion of Mercury

Observational errors explain it, DA! Observing near the Sun is still
very difficult.

Saul Levy


On Sat, 31 May 2008 14:11:12 -0700 (PDT), Double-A
wrote:

There were reported sightings in the 19th century. Perhaps today's
telescopes have become optically blind to it for some reason. Or
else, it's a cover up!

Double-A

  #7  
Old June 11th 08, 12:43 PM posted to alt.astronomy
oldcoot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,357
Default The Advance of the Perihelion of Mercury

On Jun 9, 10:53*am, "Painius" wrote:

Planet Krypton of Superman
fame was also orbiting on the other side of the Sun in
Earth's precise orbit before it was destroyed.

You sure about that, Paine? As an avid comic book reader in days of
yore, i vaguely remember something about the "red sun of Krypton". The
story line always seemed to imply it was 'waaay far distant from our
solar system.
  #8  
Old June 11th 08, 01:17 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Painius Painius is offline
Banned
 
First recorded activity by SpaceBanter: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,144
Default The Advance of the Perihelion of Mercury

"oldcoot" wrote in message...
...
On Jun 9, 10:53 am, "Painius" wrote:

Planet Krypton of Superman
fame was also orbiting on the other side of the Sun in
Earth's precise orbit before it was destroyed.


You sure about that, Paine? As an avid comic book reader in days of
yore, i vaguely remember something about the "red sun of Krypton". The
story line always seemed to imply it was 'waaay far distant from our
solar system.


Yes, the red sun came a little later. IIRC, it was the
very first time Kal-El's origins were exposed, either
the first or second episode, i think.

oops, here it is...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter...sion_.26_radio

It was the first episode of the radio show, "The
Adventures of Superman", that debuted February 12,
1940. I think the comic mag was only about a half a
year old at the time, and the initial comic strip had
been started about a year before that.

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine

P.S. Thank YOU for reading!

P.P.S. Some secret sites (shh)...
http://painellsworth.net
http://savethechildren.org
http://eBook-eDen.secretsgolden.com



  #9  
Old June 18th 08, 04:00 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Saul Levy Saul Levy is offline
Banned
 
First recorded activity by SpaceBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 21,291
Default The Advance of the Perihelion of Mercury

Even anti-Earth can't hide behind the Sun all the time, Paine!

It doesn't exist.

Saul Levy


On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 17:53:18 GMT, "Painius"
wrote:

"Saul Levy" wrote in message...
.. .


As for Vulcan? DA, you just might be pinning your hopes to
a pipe dream. Don't you think that the position of Vulcan
based on its possible influence upon Mercury has been being
followed precisely ever since the mid 50's when Dicke started
raising hell? And alas, no physical planet has yet to show up
in that mythical planetary orbit within the orbit of Mercury.
Don't you think it would have been found many years ago if
it does indeed exist?


Vulcan, like Wormwood, doesn't exist, Paine and DA.

No planet can hide BEHIND the Sun. It will be seen at times, yet has
never been seen.

Tholen is wasting his time. Astronomers who waste time in that way
are declared NUTJOBS!

Astrologers LOVE invisible planets! It's there, you just can't see
it! Nothing hides from IR detectors.

BAWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Saul Levy


That's what i said, Saul, Vulcan can't exist or it would
have been discovered by now. As for no planet hiding
behind the Sun, Venus, Mercury, heck, several planets
sometimes hide behind the Sun.

You seem to be thinking of, not Vulcan, which was
supposed to be going around the Sun in its own orbit
just like the rest of the planets, but only nearer to the
Sun than Mercury, instead you appear to be thinking
a modern version of the "Counter Earth", also called
"Antichthon". The modern version would be a planet
that lies in the exact same orbit as Earth, but on the
opposite side of the Sun. Planet Krypton of Superman
fame was also orbiting on the other side of the Sun in
Earth's precise orbit before it was destroyed.

The thing that does it for me is knowing just how exact
and precise the measurements must be when planning
an excursion to the Moon or Mars. The Phoenix, for
example, would have missed Mars by a country light-
hour if there were a planet Vulcan, simply because the
scientists who plotted Phoenix's path from Earth to
Mars did not allow for the gravitational effects of a
planet Vulcan!

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Perihelion of Mercury question Sorcerer Astronomy Misc 13 January 6th 07 09:24 PM
Perihelion of Mercury question Sorcerer Astronomy Misc 114 January 1st 07 11:36 PM
Eris at perihelion [email protected] Amateur Astronomy 1 December 4th 06 09:07 PM
Perihelion of Mercury with classical mechanics ? [email protected] Astronomy Misc 34 April 28th 05 06:57 PM
Perihelion Puzzle OG UK Astronomy 3 January 6th 04 12:17 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.