March 19, 2017
There is only one adjustable, the constant relativistic hamiltonian H0 = H – m c squared. The non relativistic hamiltonian H sub N, can be measured experimentally using the semi major axis a of the Newtonian ellipse, H sub N = – mMG / (2a). The semi major axis is a = alpha / ( 1 – epsilon squared), where alpha is the half right latitude and epsilon the eccentricity. All quantities are in astronomical tables. Claims of accuracy for the obsolete Einsteinian general relativity (EGR) were based on the assumption that the precessions due to other planets (the great majority of the precession) had been dealt with correctly. ”
Using general relativity to treat the other planets makes no measurable difference. On the other hand, what puzzles us is that you do not apply your fatuous theory to the other planets. Your theory somehow seems to generate the discrepancy between the classical and GR result directly, rather than the GR result itself. And it does all that without having to include data on the other planets at all! And yet again we ask, what does your theory predict concerning tidal effects? That was the big failing of the theory of your Welsh rival in crackpottery, Viv Pope. He claimed that the apple hit Newton because it was orbiting at the wrong speed, not because of gravity at all. He even got a university mathematician to back him up, just as Siemens Stain backs you up. Neither of them bothered to explain what causes the tides if there is no gravity. As you claim, there certainly are some worthless types employed by government and industry.
“Myles Mathis has pointed out that these precessions are calculated with the Newtonian theory, whereas they should have been consistently calculated relativistically. I have never seen any logical reply to the criticisms by Myles Mathis and Stephen Crothers, and by many other good scholars. ”
We do not know who Myles Mathis is, but there is an annoying troll called Miles Mathis who writes utter drivel about mathematics and physics. If you follow his reasoning, make sure that you use the correct value of π. Mr Mathis has proved conclusively that it is equal to 4. Are you now going to use that value, and still come up (directly) with the exact discrepancy in the precession of the orbit of mercury? We think that you could.
“I have only seen examples of scientific trolling, abuse, name calling and so on. That is unethical and illegal conduct. The laws on trolling are being tightened up rapidly worldwide. When the Einstein and Newton theories are tested against the velocity curve of a whirlpool galaxy, they both fail completely (see “Principles of ECE”). This means that the standard physicists continue to use a theory that is known to have failed completely – EGR. This is completely dishonest, the reason is that a lot of grant money is involved. Let there be no doubt that trolling is a serious criminal offence.”
As we pointed out recently, some immediate curbs should be put on the freedom of members of the lunatic fringe to misinform the general public. The damage that ridiculous pseudoscientific ideas can do to the education of young people can be long-lasting and devastating. For instance, Laithwaite’s silly ideas concerning gyroscopes (and moths) have found their way into certain encyclopedias and textbooks. Ultimately, the lunatic fringe will do as much damage to a country’s economic viability as will a TV presenter who becomes President (how ironic it is that he never served any sort of apprenticeship for that job).