On 6 fév, 12:15, "Androcles" wrote:
wrote in message

...
On 6 fév, 11:48, "Androcles" wrote:



wrote in message

...
On 6 fév, 02:34, Pentcho Valev wrote:

http://philipball.blogspot.com/2007/...-was-innocent-....
"With the technology then available, measuring the bending of
starlight was very challenging. And contrary to popular belief,
Newtonian physics did not predict that light would remain undeflected
- Einstein himself pointed out in 1911 that Newtonian gravity should
cause some deviation too. So the matter was not that of an all-or-
nothing shift in stars' positions, but hinged on the exact numbers."

| Right.

| Classical Newtonian mechanics predicts that light will bend with
| twice the angle observed.

How?

| Lapsus. Its the reverse.

| I meant to write half the angle observed. and for corrected
| relativistic
| Newtonian, the angle is twice that of classical Newtonian, as is
| observed.

Ok, but my real question is how does classical Newtonian mechanics
prophesy that light will bend at all? It does, I'm wondering if you,
Eddington or Einstein knows how.

They certainly did since Einstein did the calculation himself.
And I do too.

Explained summarily, to proceed, for the requirements of
calculation he converted the energy of a photon to its
equivalent mass (m=E/c^2) and proceeded to calculate
the deflection of theoretical "masses" for visible light
photons as they grazed the Sun mass.

This gave half the deflection angle that was later observed.

His calculations are in a paper from 1911 titled
"Über den Einfluß der Schwerkraft auf die Ausbreitung
des Lichter"

He later 1915 corrected the figures and obtained the
right deflection (twice that of classical Newtonian).

However, the same correct deflection angle can easily
be obtained from upgraded relativistic Newtonian,
something that has never been documented, since the
1919 Eddington et al. observation was specifically
meant to prove the superiority of GR over classical
mechanics.

Just like the community never considered confirming
atomic clock speeding up with altitude with parallel
mechanical clocks experiments.

They were not looking for the truth, but to prove
a point.

André Michaud