SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
3,266
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 105:
Line 105: + + + + +
Essay:Rebuttal to Counterexamples to Relativity (view source)
Revision as of 04:58, March 26, 2015
, 04:58, March 26, 2015Elementary, my dear Watson.
#:::It's one thing to speculate on science; it's quite another to speculate on the motives of scientists, particularly the idea that scientists are embarrassed by their knowledge that relativity is wrong, and that they are covering up this embarrassment as part of some political agenda.
#:::It's one thing to speculate on science; it's quite another to speculate on the motives of scientists, particularly the idea that scientists are embarrassed by their knowledge that relativity is wrong, and that they are covering up this embarrassment as part of some political agenda.
#::::REPLY: The relativists' silence in the journals about increasingly precise measurements of the advance of the perihelion of Mercury is akin to the famous story of the dog that didn't bark, which is itself compelling proof.
#::::REPLY: The relativists' silence in the journals about increasingly precise measurements of the advance of the perihelion of Mercury is akin to the famous story of the dog that didn't bark, which is itself compelling proof.
#:::::You can't just invoke the Sherlock Holmes ''Silver Blaze'' story to support any claim you wish to make. In that story, Holmes knew that the guilty person had to have been in a certain house at a certain time. The dog would have barked if that person had been a stranger, because dogs bark at strangers. Therefore, the villain was in his own house. There was a specific and credible chain of logic from the non-barking dog to the identification of the guilty party.
#:
#:::::In the perihelion case, there is abundant orbital data (undoubtedly gigabytes of it) for the various planets and moons. Some of it was in the Jurgens ''et al'' paper noted above, and other data was analyzed in the Pijpers paper. That paper, by the way, says "The value of the gravitational quadrupole moment (28) when combined with planetary ranging data for the precession of the orbit of Mercury yields a value [...] which is consistent with GR ..."
#:
#:::::There is actually a very simple explanation for the scientific community's silence on this matter, a deduction of which Mr. Holmes would approve: The reason that no one is publishing data or analyses that claim to refute relativity is that such claim would be false, and that the existing analyses, using exquisitely accurate spacecraft data, are correct.
#:
#:
#''Despite wasting millions of taxpayer dollars searching for gravity waves predicted by the theory, none has ever been found. Sound like global warming?''
#''Despite wasting millions of taxpayer dollars searching for gravity waves predicted by the theory, none has ever been found. Sound like global warming?''