Re: How Can Light NOT be Ballistic?


"Jerry" <Cephalobus_alienus@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1146233135.924402.64910@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| Hexenmeister wrote:
| > "Jerry" <Cephalobus_alienus@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > news:1146211642.201226.279840@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | You call research repeatedly confirmed by hundreds of astronomers
| > | and physicists since Le Verrier's first reports in 1843 heresay?
| >
| > From you, yes, it's hearsay.
| > Witness for the defense has shown no evidence, your honour.
| > I ask that evidence be presented or the testimony be stricken from
| > the record and the winess be instructed not to repeat it.
|
| You're really hopeless, you know that?

No, I don't know that. I'd say you were a hopeless braggart.

| Where is -your- evidence?

Evidence for what? Your wild claims that you've since snipped, you
stupid moron?
Here it is:
news:1146179682.902143.95740@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


My brother says that calculating
| precessions is a relatively simple exercise in perturbation
| theory that you can pick up from any decent textbook in orbital
| mechanics.

Then do it, shithead.

Packrat that he is, he still has his Danby from
| when he was an NSF Summer Science Program student at the
| Thatcher School in Ojai, CA, over three decades ago.
| (He's 26 years older than me. I was a bit of a surprise...)


Danby, "Celestial Mechanics", with early line-numbered BASIC programs.
I remember it, but I'm not a packrat.

|
| He says that working it out would be fun, and he might have
| time in the next couple of months to help me out on the
| computation. Assuming he does, what will be your response?

Get on with it instead of babbling hearsay and do the GR calculation as
well.
Make sure you include Venus, Earth (and its moon), Mars, the asteroid belt,
Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune and Uranus. I won't ask for Pluto, its 208 year
orbit
and small size cannot possibly be used in a fucking wild and stupid
claim "The discrepancy between 5557 predicted and 5600 observed
is the ANOMALOUS precession, unexplainable by Newtonian mechanics."

BTW, the word is "inexplicable", not unexplainable.

Include the exact mass and exact period of each, if you can't then put upper
and lower error boundaries on each and do a worst case and best case
calculation, and do it on a spread*** so that I can check your work.
I want to see 38 arc seconds per century, +/- 0.5 arc seconds.

A couple of months... ok, I expect your result by July 1st, but I'll be
generous and give you until August 1st, a whole extra month.
Make a note on your calendar, "compute 5557 +/-0.5 deadline Aug 1 2006"
That's more than a complete orbit of Mercury.

Your bluff is called, put up or shut up.
We'll see who is hopeless, creep.
Androcles


.

Quantcast