Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Michael Mozina
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by TinFoilHat
We can determine the average density of the sun from its size and mass. We can determine its size by simple measurement and trigonometry, and its mass by the gravitational acceleration it produces on everything in the solar system.
|
But you don't know how electromagnetic charges influence planetary orbits.
|
It can be safely said that EM charges do not influence planetary orbits to any significant degree, since all the planetary probes wouldn't have arrived at any of the planets, since those trajectories and the planetary orbits used only gravitational considerations. if you want to claim or imply otherwise, you're going to have to show it.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Michael Mozina
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by TinFoilHat
According to relativity, light rays passing near a massive object will be bent by its gravity. Photons have no charge, so their paths cannot be bent by electromagnetic forces, only gravity. We can measure the sun's mass accurately, without worrying about interference from possible electromagnetic effects, by measuring how much light from distant stars and radio waves from distant pulsars is bent by the sun's gravity. Measurements of the sun's mass this way agree with the mass determined by gravitational acceleration within 1%.
|
What is the mass of a photon? How are you measuring this affect exactly and what calculations are you using?
|
The mass of a photon is 0 and the calculations used are
here. Do you disagree with them?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Michael Mozina
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by TinFoilHat
Michael is going to have to disprove Relativity. Good luck!
|
I never said a word about the theory of relativity being wrong. That is called a strawman by the way.
|
No strawman here. The amount of bending of lEM radiation is based on the sun's radius and density (Which will give you its mass). If the sun is made of heavier elements as you claim, then the density and mass is greater that what is used to calculate (and those calculations match observations) the bending of light and orbital parameters. IOW if the sun's composition is as you claim, the calculated predictions and observatios wouldn't match as they now do.
And BTW, you have claimed relativity is wrong.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Michael Mozina
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Tensor
Actually there is. According to GR, the sun doesn't have the mass to focus neutrinos in the manner you claim. Care to show where GR is wrong on this?
|
Show me the math. I'll show you the problem |
Claiming you can show us a problem with GR math indicates you think it is wrong. So, I'll repost the math links
here or
here, if you want to include a spinning star. So where exactly is the problem, or are going to retract your claims of the sun focusing neutrinos at 1 AU, instead of the the ~540 AU focal length based on GR calculations and your claim there is a problem with GR.