View Single Post
  #7  
Old February 6th 08 posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,fr.sci.physique,fr.sci.maths,fr.sci.philo
Androcles[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,848
Default LEE SMOLIN AGAINST ISAAC NEWTON


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.


Ads
 

Cell Phones - Free Advertising - Loans - Consolidation - Personal Loans