[jsaldea12 (OP)]

That is the only way  the anomalous precession of Mercury can be resolved, by working back. Dr. Einstein did it.. Forum King mentioned this working back in this forum... jsa feb. 20, 2019

[mad aetherist]

American astronomer Tom Van Flandern, who once worked for the U.S. Naval Observatory in Washington and runs a website (www.metaresearch.org) with a newsletter that promotes interest in scientific ideas “outside of the mainstream of theories in Astronomy”, claims to have discovered a dirty secret.
...
According to him, the confusing “rigmarole” of relativity isn’t needed to maintain the GPS, even though in theory it should be.

Einstein’s theory of relativity says that, for something moving very fast, such as a satellite, time would seem to move more slowly compared with something standing still on the Earth. Van Flandern has argued that clock rates on GPS satellites should therefore need to be adjusted continuously to keep them synchronised with users on Earth. But they’re not, he told Tom Bethell, a senior editor of The American Spectator magazine and author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science. The GPS programmers don’t need relativity. “They have basically blown off Einstein,” Van Flandern said.

If Van Flandern says this, then he is very mistaken indeed.  GPS fails in seconds without adjustments for relativity.  The clocks up there purposefully run slow to stay roughly in sync with the ground.  They'd otherwise run fast and get ever further ahead of the ones on the ground.  The software knows the exact position and speed of each satellite and computes the relativistic adjustments needed in order to compute the exact distance to the satellite in question.  Without those software adjustments, the user would not be able to locate himself.  So the claim that GPS programmers don't need relativity is utter nonsense.  Relativity is all through the GPS software.  This is pretty poor form for somebody supposedly working for the Naval Observatory, but perhaps he just cleaned the floors there or something.

No u are wrong. GPS doesnt need any relativity of any sort, not Einsteinian, not Lorentzian. They apply a clock correction before launch, & then make clock adjustments each day as needed.  I believe that the pre-launch corrections are not needed but that they make the daily corrections simpler (by being smaller).
Aether theory, & aetherwind theory, applied to the Lorentz gamma, would work best.  However i reckon that neoLorentz Relativity is wrong because i think that the Shapiro Delay is real (Alby got-predicted something right, albeit for wrong reasons).

[mad aetherist]

Astronomers have long observed that Mercury’s orbit is elliptical and that the point where the planet draws closest to the Sun moves, like the oval end of an ellipse drawn with a spirograph. Over the years this ‘perihelion’ point revolves around the Sun just like the planet itself. It was assumed to be due to gravity and the proximity of the planet to the Sun, but Newtonian theory could never predict its advance accurately. It was a classic problem by the time Einstein came along, and his General Theory of Relativity solved it immediately.

Too brilliantly, for some. According to the Bethell’s account, Van Flandern “asked a colleague at the University of Maryland, who as a young man had overlapped with Einstein at Princeton’s Institute for Advanced Study, how, in his opinion, Einstein had arrived at the correct multiplier. This man said it was his impression that, ‘knowing the answer,’ Einstein had ‘jiggered the arguments until they came out with the right value’.”

The jiggered answer was known far earlier than Einstein's time, since it was exactly twice the value predicted by Newton.  Nobody jiggered that number since doing so contradicted the rest of the theory.  Similarly the GR equation derives from the basic principles in the theory, else a jiggered value would never have passed peer review, just like it never did with Newton's theory.

I doubt that the bending of light stuff re GR helps here. Re the jiggering, this was i think the invoking of relativistic mass.  I dont think that relativistic mass comes into the bending of light near the Sun.  Einstein somehow came up with the correct number, a true prediction, unlike Mercury which is an anti-prediction. But Einstein didnt use relativistic mass in his doubled-bending calcs (i think).

[Kryptid]

Here is some good wordage re this.

Just as I thought, no evidence, just a bunch of unverified suspicions...

I wonder whether there is a circular argument in there somewhere.

Explain how.

But in any case all it takes is one disagreement to sink the equation

Which is not evidence that such a disagreement actually exists.

i believe that Mars or Venus does just that.

I don't what you "believe". Give me a link to a reputable source showing that the precession of Mars and Venus clash with relativity's predictions.

That is the only way  the anomalous precession of Mercury can be resolved, by working back.

Just because you can't understand how he worked it out doesn't mean that working backwards is the only way he could have done it.

[jsaldea12 (OP)]

You have doubt that this is  the work of a fraud? Refer to Table B, semilatus rectum and compare the anomalous precession of all planets  with the Computation B using simple math equation. Same/exact anomalous precession on both!!. Reiterating, this is the only way Dr. Einstein saw the problem., by working back and he did it. That is not fraudulent. Jsa 2.20.19

[Kryptid]

Reiterating, this is the only way Dr. Einstein saw the problem., by working back and he did it.

Saying it more than once doesn't make it true.

[mad aetherist]

No u are wrong. GPS doesnt need any relativity of any sort, not Einsteinian, not Lorentzian. They apply a clock correction before launch, & then make clock adjustments each day as needed.  I believe that the pre-launch corrections are not needed but that they make the daily corrections simpler (by being smaller).

If they make daily corrections to the satellites, that would be poor engineering.  But you are contradicting yourself.  If GPS didn't need any relativity of any sort, then such clock corrections (if they are done, which I deny) would not be needed. Most of the absolutist crackpots at least have an interpretation of physics that works, but you don't even back anything workable.

I didnt say that the daily (or twice daily) corrections were not because of relativity, i said that the daily corrections did not use relativity (ie they didnt use some kind of an equation with a gamma of some kind).  And they dont use gamma for their clock correction before takeoff.

[mad aetherist]

I doubt that the bending of light stuff re GR helps here. Re the jiggering, this was i think the invoking of relativistic mass.  I dont think that relativistic mass comes into the bending of light near the Sun.

Relativistic mass comes into play in the precession equation, as stated in your quoted bit.  It wasn't talking about light bending.

Yes & using some kind of relativistic mass increase to help get a number is fraud.  Altho i might be happy to go along with a relativistic momentum increase, but definitely not a mass increase, the momentum increase being due to length contraction & or ticking dilation (not due to any silly kind of mass increase).  Especially bearing in mind that re momentum (& everything else) u can probly have a true momentum, & an actual momentum, & a measured momentum (three possible momentums), but re mass u can have a true mass & a measured mass (but not an actual mass)(the actual mass never changes)(its the true mass).

[mad aetherist]

Here is some good wordage re this.

Just as I thought, no evidence, just a bunch of unverified suspicions.  Yes.

I wonder whether there is a circular argument in there somewhere.

Explain how. 
I think that even good theories etc can have a circular argument, as long as u know, but not knowing can i think lead to a bloody war. The main circular argument in SR & GR is that much of GR is modeled around ensuring that the constancy of the speed of light is retained, eg near mass, eg invoking time dilation & length contraction near mass to yield the slowing of light near mass.

But in any case all it takes is one disagreement to sink the equation

Which is not evidence that such a disagreement actually exists.

i believe that Mars or Venus does just that.

I don't what you "believe". Give me a link to a reputable source showing that the precession of Mars and Venus clash with relativity's predictions.
 It would be handy to have easy access to such a list of precessions for all the planets.  But so difficult to find.  I wonder why. Must be a good reason. Thinking thinking thinking.

[jsaldea12 (OP)]

What I feared actually is what if somebody might come up and claim the same translation to simple match  equation the anomalous precession of Mercury.  COMPARE THE SIMPLE MATH COMPUTATION, USING SEMILATUS RECTUM COMPUTATION B TO RELATIVISTIC COMPUTATION PER ANNEX B. SEE THE FIGURES FOR ALL PLANETS. THEY ARE THE SAME AND EXACT.!!IT PROVES THAT THE COMPUTATION OF DR. EINSTEIN IS THAT WAY, WORK BACK. Now what is the question? Jsa  feb. 20, 2019

[Kryptid]

I think that even good theories etc can have a circular argument, as long as u know, but not knowing can i think lead to a bloody war. The main circular argument in SR & GR is that much of GR is modeled around ensuring that the constancy of the speed of light is retained, eg near mass, eg invoking time dilation & length contraction near mass to yield the slowing of light near mass.

That's not what I'm asking. I'm asking specifically how an equation derived in advance being so highly accurate when new data is used with it has anything to do with circular reasoning. Either an equation makes accurate predictions or it doesn't. There's nothing circular about it.

It would be handy to have easy access to such a list of precessions for all the planets.  But so difficult to find. 

So when you claimed that Venus and Mars don't match relativistic predictions (such as when you said that the anomalous perihelion precession of Mars is ten arcseconds instead of one), you were pulling numbers out of thin air?

I wonder why. Must be a good reason. Thinking thinking thinking.

Because there's a conspiracy to hide that obviously troubling data, of course. 

COMPARE THE SIMPLE MATH COMPUTATION, USING SEMILATUS RECTUM COMPUTATION B TO RELATIVISTIC COMPUTATION PER ANNEX B. SEE THE FIGURES FOR ALL PLANETS. THEY ARE THE SAME AND EXACT.!!IT PROVES THAT THE COMPUTATION OF DR. EINSTEIN IS THAT WAY, WORK BACK.

Non-sequitur. How does it prove that he worked backwards?

[jsaldea12 (OP)]

Computation  A   (reference  actual Annex A)                                       
 -------------------------------(arcsec)------------------(arcsec-century)
 -----------Actual--------Prec----- Rev. per-------------GR anomalous-
 ----------Annex A-------per rev-- century--  – .------percession arc/sec/century.
Mercury--36/36—x--- .1035.8 --x- 414.94---=---- ------42.98
Venus --36/67.25 x---..1035.8--- x--162.60- ------------8.6186
Earth---36/92.95  x---.1035.8 -x-100.00= -------------- 3.8345-
Mars---36/141,65 x --.1035.8--x-- 53.191- --------- ---1.3502
Jupiter--36/483.75 x .1035.8--x 8.4317---- ---------- ---.0682-
Saturn-- 36/886.9 x -.1035.8—x- 3.3944------------.----0172-
Uranus--36/1758.36x.1035.8—x-1.1903-- ---------.---- 0037
Neptune -36/2795- x-.1035.8—x-.606---------------.--- 0008-
Pluto -- 36/3655.5 x--.1035.8-- x -.4132  = --- ----------.0004
 
 
Annex  A
                  Planetary comparative distances from sun
                             Distance (mega miles)
                          Perihelion Aphelion            Average                                                                                        .
       Mercury------28.6 --------43.4-----------------36
       Venus --------66.8--------67.7-----------------67.25
       Earth ---------91.4---------94.5----------------92.95
       Mars --------128.4--------154.9--------------141.65
       Jupiter------460.3--------507.2--------------483.75
       Saturn ------837.6-------936.2 --------------886.9
       Uranus----1699.0------1868.0 ------------1758.35
       Neptune--2771.0 --- --2819.0 ------------2795
       Pluto------2756.0 -----4555.0 -------------3655.5

Based on above computation A, anomalous precession of 42.98 arc/sec/cent. is actual, is given and is worked back to the problem, the precession per revolution. This is computed and supplied!!.re- 42.98/ 414.94= .1035.8 This arc/sec per revolution is the missing item!!! Must b supplied. Why? The anomalous precession of 42.98 arc/sec/cent is actual , is unquestionable as all the veteran astronomers of the time adamantly insistEd there is anomalous precession.. Dr. Einstein knew this is not the problem, thus, it appears, he approached  the problem by starting from 42.98!!! and worked back..   How can we be sure this is the correct  relativistic computation., refer to Computation B
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Computation B Based on Semilatus Rectum Annex B

---------------Semilatus----- Prec. per rev.---Rev.per century-- Prec. per century
------------------Rectum-------(arc sec)--                                     (arc sec)-       
Mercury--------.55.44------- .1034---------- 414.937---------- 42.9195
Venus----------108.19-------- .0530--------- 162.6016-----------8.6186
Earth-----------149.55.----- .0383 ---------- 100.000----------- 3.8345
Mars------------225.92----- .0254 -----------53.1915----------- 1.3502
Jupiter---------776.50------ .0074 -------------8.4317----------- .0623
Saturn ------1422.52---------.0040------------3.3944------------ .0137
Uranus ----2863.26------- .0020-------------1.1903--------------.0024
Neptune----4496.23------- .0013-------------.6068------------- .0008
Pluto----------5531.25-------.0010-----------.4032-------------- .0004


Annex B
Based on the elements of the planetary orbits we can construct the following table of relativistic precession.
 
 

It dawns that whatever figure is anomalous precession of Mercury, 41, or 43, or 44 arc/sec/cent, based  on semimajor axis, semilatus rectum will arrive at the exact figure of anomalous precession.. No wonder, astronomers were amazed and commented: Einstein’s solution does not leave room for  adjustment..(plus 5, minus 5). But note, the equation of Eminent Scientist Dr. Albert Einstein is very beautiful, THE ONLY WAY THAT ANOMALOUS PRECESSION IS ARRIVED/RESOLVED..BY WORKING BACK..
Jsaldea12
Roxas City
Feb. 19, 2019
 

[jsaldea12 (OP)]

Here is the simple math equations:that is uncannily the same with theastronomical                                         
Equations:


Computation  A   (reference  to Annex A)                                       
 -------------------------------(arcsec)------------------(arcsec-century)
 -----------Actual--------Prec----- Rev. per-------------GR anomalous-
 ----------Annex A-------per rev-- century--  – .------percession arc/sec/century.
Mercury--36/36—x--- .1035.8 --x- 414.94---=---- ------42.98
Venus --36/67.25 x---..1035.8--- x--162.60- ------------8.6186
Earth---36/92.95  x---.1035.8 -x-100.00= -------------- 3.8345-
Mars---36/141,65 x --.1035.8--x-- 53.191- --------- ---1.3502
Jupiter--36/483.75 x .1035.8--x 8.4317---- ---------- ---.0682-
Saturn-- 36/886.9 x -.1035.8—x- 3.3944------------.----0172-
Uranus--36/1758.36x.1035.8—x-1.1903-- ---------.---- 0037
Neptune -36/2795- x-.1035.8—x-.606---------------.--- 0008-
Pluto -- 36/3655.5 x--.1035.8-- x -.4132  = --- ----------.0004
 
 
Annex  A
                  Planetary comparative distances from sun
                             Distance (mega miles)
                          Perihelion Aphelion            Average                                                                                        .
       Mercury------28.6 --------43.4-----------------36
       Venus --------66.8--------67.7-----------------67.25
       Earth ---------91.4---------94.5----------------92.95
       Mars --------128.4--------154.9--------------141.65
       Jupiter------460.3--------507.2--------------483.75
       Saturn ------837.6-------936.2 --------------886.9
       Uranus----1699.0------1868.0 ------------1758.35
       Neptune--2771.0 --- --2819.0 ------------2795
       Pluto------2756.0 -----4555.0 -------------3655.5

Based on above computation A, anomalous precession of 42.98 arc/sec/cent. is actual, is given and is worked back to the problem, the precession per revolution. This is computed and supplied!!.re- 42.98/ 414.94= .1035.8 This arc/sec per revolution is the missing item!!! Must b supplied. Why? The anomalous precession of 42.98 arc/sec/cent is actual , is unquestionable as all the veteran astronomers of the time adamantly insistEd there is anomalous precession.. Dr. Einstein knew this is not the problem, thus, it appears, he approached  the problem by starting from 42.98!!! and worked back..   How can we be sure this is the correct  relativistic computation., refer to Computation B
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Computation B Based on Semilatus Rectum Annex B

---------------Semilatus----- Prec. per rev.---Rev.per century-- Prec. per century
------------------Rectum-------(arc sec)--                                     (arc sec)-       
Mercury--------.55.44------- .1034---------- 414.937---------- 42.9195
Venus----------108.19-------- .0530--------- 162.6016-----------8.6186
Earth-----------149.55.----- .0383 ---------- 100.000----------- 3.8345
Mars------------225.92----- .0254 -----------53.1915----------- 1.3502
Jupiter---------776.50------ .0074 -------------8.4317----------- .0623
Saturn ------1422.52---------.0040------------3.3944------------ .0137
Uranus ----2863.26------- .0020-------------1.1903--------------.0024
Neptune----4496.23------- .0013-------------.6068------------- .0008
Pluto----------5531.25-------.0010-----------.4032-------------- .0004


.
 Annex B  pertaining to schedule of semilatus rectum, please refer to:
https://www.mathpages.com/rr/s6-02/6-02.htm
 

It dawns that whatever figure is anomalous precession of Mercury, 41, or 43, or 44 arc/sec/cent, based  on semimajor axis, semilatus rectum will arrive at the exact figure of anomalous precession.. No wonder, astronomers were amazed and commented: Einstein’s solution does not leave room for  adjustment..(plus 5, minus 5). But note, the equation of Eminent Scientist Dr. Albert Einstein is very beautiful, THE ONLY WAY THAT ANOMALOUS PRECESSION IS ARRIVED/RESOLVED..BY WORKING BACK..
Jsaldea12
Roxas City
Feb. 19, 2019
 

[jsaldea12 (OP)]

Why do you fiercely dishonor Dr. Einstein?

[Bored chemist]

i believe that Mars or Venus does just that.

You can believe what you like.
But the evidence does not support you.

HE ONLY WAY THAT ANOMALOUS PRECESSION IS ARRIVED/RESOLVED..BY WORKING BACK..

And again.
How did he work back to get the right answer for data that he didn't have?

Go back and read reply #44. Einstein had no way of knowing what the precession rate of the Hulse-Taylor binary would be, yet his equation predicts it accurately. You can't work backwards from data you don't have.

[Bored chemist]

Einstein’s theory of relativity says that, for something moving very fast, such as a satellite, time would seem to move more slowly compared with something standing still on the Earth. Van Flandern has argued that clock rates on GPS satellites should therefore need to be adjusted continuously to keep them synchronised with users on Earth. But they’re not, he told Tom Bethell, a senior editor of The American Spectator magazine and author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science. The GPS programmers don’t need relativity. “They have basically blown off Einstein,” Van Flandern said.

The clocks are deliberately set to run at the "wrong" rate when on Earth.
That was carefully set up so that they would run at the right rate when in orbit.
"To compensate for the discrepancy, the frequency standard on board each satellite is given a rate offset prior to launch, making it run slightly slower than the desired frequency on Earth; specifically, at 10.22999999543 MHz instead of 10.23 MHz.[17] Since the atomic clocks on board the GPS satellites are precisely tuned, it makes the system a practical engineering application of the scientific theory of relativity in a real-world environment.[18] Placing atomic clocks on artificial satellites to test Einstein's general theory was proposed by Friedwardt Winterberg in 1955.[19]"
From
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Error_analysis_for_the_Global_Positioning_System#Special_and_general_relativity

GPS is one of the best known proofs that relativity is right.

[mad aetherist]

Einstein’s theory of relativity says that, for something moving very fast, such as a satellite, time would seem to move more slowly compared with something standing still on the Earth. Van Flandern has argued that clock rates on GPS satellites should therefore need to be adjusted continuously to keep them synchronised with users on Earth. But they’re not, he told Tom Bethell, a senior editor of The American Spectator magazine and author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science. The GPS programmers don’t need relativity. “They have basically blown off Einstein,” Van Flandern said.

The clocks are deliberately set to run at the "wrong" rate when on Earth.
That was carefully set up so that they would run at the right rate when in orbit.
"To compensate for the discrepancy, the frequency standard on board each satellite is given a rate offset prior to launch, making it run slightly slower than the desired frequency on Earth; specifically, at 10.22999999543 MHz instead of 10.23 MHz.[17] Since the atomic clocks on board the GPS satellites are precisely tuned, it makes the system a practical engineering application of the scientific theory of relativity in a real-world environment.[18] Placing atomic clocks on artificial satellites to test Einstein's general theory was proposed by Friedwardt Winterberg in 1955.[19]" From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Error_analysis_for_the_Global_Positioning_System#Special_and_general_relativity
GPS is one of the best known proofs that relativity is right.

Rubbish. It is evidence not proof. It is evidence for an infinite number of postulates, especially for aetherwind & neoLorentz Relativity, but not so much for Einsteinian Relativity. Hatch mentions this. We have been throo all of this before. However i might have changed my tune since then.

What i now reckon is that both Rs are wrong, i reckon that ER correctly includes the slowing of light near mass, ie i am now thinking that Shapiro Delay is correct (but for wrong reasons), & that (1) slowing must affect LC & TD (in addition to the V of the aetherwind affecting gamma & affecting LD & TD (2)).  Einstein's relative-v we know does not work in Lorentz's gamma (see the Twins Contradiction)(it aint a paradox).

This 2nd aspect of LC & TD is what made me invent Photaenos, the cause of em radiation (& the cause of refraction)(& the cause of the double bending of light near the Sun etc).

[jsaldea12 (OP)]

Because it was not there anymore, please show the computations I posted that proved  Einstein’s astronomical computation of the anomalous precession of Mercury  can be translated into simple match equation any high school student can understand. Jsaldeza12 Feb. 22, 2019

[jsaldea12 (OP)]

Sorry, the computations are posted. jsa

[Bored chemist]

Einstein’s theory of relativity says that, for something moving very fast, such as a satellite, time would seem to move more slowly compared with something standing still on the Earth. Van Flandern has argued that clock rates on GPS satellites should therefore need to be adjusted continuously to keep them synchronised with users on Earth. But they’re not, he told Tom Bethell, a senior editor of The American Spectator magazine and author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science. The GPS programmers don’t need relativity. “They have basically blown off Einstein,” Van Flandern said.

The clocks are deliberately set to run at the "wrong" rate when on Earth.
That was carefully set up so that they would run at the right rate when in orbit.
"To compensate for the discrepancy, the frequency standard on board each satellite is given a rate offset prior to launch, making it run slightly slower than the desired frequency on Earth; specifically, at 10.22999999543 MHz instead of 10.23 MHz.[17] Since the atomic clocks on board the GPS satellites are precisely tuned, it makes the system a practical engineering application of the scientific theory of relativity in a real-world environment.[18] Placing atomic clocks on artificial satellites to test Einstein's general theory was proposed by Friedwardt Winterberg in 1955.[19]" From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Error_analysis_for_the_Global_Positioning_System#Special_and_general_relativity
GPS is one of the best known proofs that relativity is right.

Rubbish. It is evidence not proof. It is evidence for an infinite number of postulates, especially for aetherwind & neoLorentz Relativity, but not so much for Einsteinian Relativity. Hatch mentions this. We have been throo all of this before. However i might have changed my tune since then.

What i now reckon is that both Rs are wrong, i reckon that ER correctly includes the slowing of light near mass, ie i am now thinking that Shapiro Delay is correct (but for wrong reasons), & that (1) slowing must affect LC & TD (in addition to the V of the aetherwind affecting gamma & affecting LD & TD (2)).  Einstein's relative-v we know does not work in Lorentz's gamma (see the Twins Contradiction)(it aint a paradox).

This 2nd aspect of LC & TD is what made me invent Photaenos, the cause of em radiation (& the cause of refraction)(& the cause of the double bending of light near the Sun etc).

Given that your view point has been experimentally determined  not to agree with reality,  I suggest that you stop espousing predictions based on it.
Or, to put it another way; we know you are demonstrably wrong; keep quiet