Re: C


Sorcerer wrote:

43 arc seconds per century....

First of all that requires a century of observations, and since
Einstein wrote his paper in the years preceding 1915,
that means the observations began in 1815 at the latest.

You are using a particularly low quality straw for your straw men. You
don't need to 'clock' a car for an hour to know is speed in kilometers
per hour.

Secondly, let's look at the numbers. Mercury completes an
orbit in 88 days. In a century, that's 415 orbits. 360 degrees
to an orbit, 60 arc minutes to a degree, 60 arc seconds to
an arc minute. Multiplying, 537840000 arc seconds.
The error is 43 arc seconds in 537,840,000 arc seconds.

You are comparing the motion of Mercury with the motion of the
*perihelion* of Mercury - apples minus oranges.

That's 0.0000079949427338985571917298824929347 %,

That is significant figure abuse, an error expected from college
freshmen with calculators and no experience.

Thirdly, I gave you a reference, which I'll repeat.
http://www.schulphysik.de/physik/perihel/Perihel.htm
There is no mention of Jupiter or any other planet
in Einstein's calculation.

That is because your references all fail to note that the 43 seconds
per century is the *anomalous* precession - the *difference* between
the observed precession (5600 seconds per century) and the precession
calculated from the secular (non-periodic) effects of the pull of the
other planets, mainly Venus, Earth, and Jupiter (5557 seconds per
century).

Because of its mass, Jupiter
causes the Sun to orbit about a common barycentre which
is above the Sun's surface, the other planets are far less
significant, either because they are too far away or too
small (not massive enough) and so inclusion of Jupiter
is vital, the others can be ignored.

Actually brecause of its proximity, Venus has quite a strong
gravitational effect on Mercury.

I did not have an "erroneous" idea, a gratuitous and self-degrading comment.

Quite noble of you to not to claim credit for this idea. Nonetheless
your use of profanities *is* gratuitous and *does* degrade yourself.
You might have a little more credibility if you abandoned the practice.

Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: C
    ... |> Where did you get the fuckwit idea that Jupiter was included? ... | 5025 arc seconds per century, ... | Mercury's orbit, so evidently the axis is not truly stationary. ... | take into account the gravitational pull of the other planets, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: C
    ... |> Leaving out Jupiter to say Newton got it wrong? ... 5025 arc seconds per century, ... Mercury's orbit, so evidently the axis is not truly stationary. ... Newton predicted stable elliptical orbits only for the idealized ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: C
    ... |> Leaving out Jupiter to say Newton got it wrong? ... 5025 arc seconds per century, ... Mercury's orbit, so evidently the axis is not truly stationary. ... problem in Newtonian mechanics, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Orbital precession w/o GR
    ... "when we observe the axis of the elliptical orbit of a planet such as ... degrees per year, which equals 5025 arc seconds per century, ... assuming Mercury's orbital axis is actually stationary. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Orbital precession w/o GR
    ... "when we observe the axis of the elliptical orbit of a planet such as ... degrees per year, which equals 5025 arc seconds per century, ... assuming Mercury's orbital axis is actually stationary. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)