"Androcles" escreveu na mensagem
. uk...

"JMA" wrote in message
...
:
: "dr_strangelove" escreveu na mensagem
: ...
: I developed an explanation of orbital precession that does not require
: GR. It only uses 2 well accepted physical formulas and some math. It
: can be viewed at:
: http://toe.sytes.net:65333/planetary%20precession.pdf
:
: I await your personal attacks and name calling.
:
: Thank you very much.
:
: The mercury's perihelion advance is 5599 arc second,
: or two degrees per century.
: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html
:
: The value you need to find is 5599, not 43.

Mercury's perihelion advance was
0.32508305640618486353538008757815 arc seconds between
June 2004 and Sept 2004 as measured by me, which is
134.88924824245825366867083570342 arc seconds per
century. That's the value you need to find. Go measure it and
see. Get Einstein to hold your telescope steady for you, because
Einstein didn't have one, you can't use his (if you can even find
Mercury, not many have ever seen it).

David has done exactly what Einstein did, contrived a result
he wanted in the hope of gaining recognition as a bull****ter.

You claim you have measured the perihelion advance.
How did you measure it? with a telescope?
Do you know what the trajectory should be, if there is
no precession ?
You need to observe during minimum two orbites and then
measure the perihelion advance.

Actually I cannot see how precession could occur without
a torque orthogonal to the plane of precession.
So far, here on earth, without torque nobody could make
anything undergo precession.

What is really a mystery is how people talk about
precession of mercury orbit, but nobody has any idea
what precession is, and what causes the torque that
causes precession. Most of the people don't even know
how torque should be applied (where the vector points)
to achieve precession of a rotating system.

Many people around here believe on precession without
torque (that is, precession by means of magic).

The fact is that I've already seen many drawings about
the perihelion advance. None looks like precession to me.
Precession is rotation around the center of mass of the
system (the Sun here) placed at the foci of the orbit.
The above drawing is not precession, or is just a bad drawing:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...v/grel.html#c2
But, so far, all drawings look wrong and I've seen many.