Discussion:
Einsteinians Publish Fraud in the Journal Science
(trop ancien pour répondre)
Pentcho Valev
2017-06-09 16:43:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"Light from a background star is deflected by the gravitational field of the Sun. This effect was used in 1919 to provide some of the first evidence for general relativity. Sahu et al. applied the concept to another star: a nearby white dwarf called Stein 2051 B, which passed close in front of a more distant normal star (see the Perspective by Oswalt). The authors measured the tiny shifts in the apparent position of the background star, an effect called astrometric microlensing. The apparent motion matched the predictions of general relativity, which allowed the authors to determine the mass of the white dwarf." http://science.sciencemag.org/content/356/6342/1046.full

The statement

"The apparent motion matched the predictions of general relativity"

is a blatant lie. Newton's theory also predicts "tiny shifts", and in order to be able to find out which prediction - Newton's or Einstein's - is correct, one must know in advance, among other things, the mass of the white dwarf, which is obviously not the case.

Confirmations of Einstein's relativity are either fraudulent or inconclusive - I'am going to expose some fraud here:

http://www.network54.com/Forum/304711/thread/1496908786/last-1497005129
Confirmations of Einstein's Relativity: Either Fraudulent or Inconclusive

Pentcho Valev
Pentcho Valev
2017-06-10 13:27:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
The fraud was published in countless journals worldwide - not even a hint at the simple argument that, since the authors did not know the mass of the white dwarf, they were unable to discriminate between the Newtonian and the Einsteinian prediction and therefore their observation has not confirmed general relativity. Even Nature uncritically parroted the lie:

"The Hubble Space Telescope has spotted light bending because of the gravity of a nearby white dwarf star - the first time astronomers have seen this type of distortion around a star other than the Sun. The finding once again confirms Einstein's general theory of relativity." http://www.nature.com/news/hubble-sees-light-bending-around-nearby-star-1.22108

My two comments in Nature:

It doesn't of course - Newton's theory also predicts light bending, and finding out, experimentally, which prediction is the correct one is impossible, even in the case of the Sun where the mass is known. In order to divert the attention from the problem, dishonest Einsteinians teach that Newton's theory predicts no deflection:

http://commons.erau.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3169&context=space-congress-proceedings
Kip Thorne: "A second crucial proof of the breakdown in Newtonian gravity was the relativistic bending of light. Einstein's theory predicted that starlight passing near the limb of the sun should be deflected by 1.75 seconds of arc, whereas NEWTON'S LAW PREDICTED NO DEFLECTION. Observations during the 1919 eclipse of the sun in Brazil, carried out by Sir Arthur Eddington and his British colleagues, brilliantly confirmed Einstein's prediction to an accuracy of about 20 percent. This dealt the final death blow to Newton's law and to most other relativistic theories of gravity."

Nature: "The amount of distortion allowed the researchers to directly calculate the white dwarf's mass - 67% that of the Sun."

This means that they have used the deflection predicted by Einstein as an ASSUMPTION - there is no confirmation of general relativity in this case. "Einsteinians" and "logic" are incompatible concepts.

Pentcho Valev

Loading...