Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
→‎Newtonian explanation of Mercury's precession: Where is the contradiction? If the exponent in Newtonian gravity is slightly adjusted, then it predicts the Mercury precession.
Line 215: Line 215:     
I removed the phrase "[precession can be understood by] factoring in the gravitational pull due to other planets".  The first sentence of that paragraph says the opposite, that the extra precession cannot be understood "even after accounting for gravitational perturbations caused all other planets". Unless I'm reading it wrong, it sounded like a contradiction.  [[User:Spielman|Spielman]] 16:51, 13 April 2012 (EDT)
 
I removed the phrase "[precession can be understood by] factoring in the gravitational pull due to other planets".  The first sentence of that paragraph says the opposite, that the extra precession cannot be understood "even after accounting for gravitational perturbations caused all other planets". Unless I'm reading it wrong, it sounded like a contradiction.  [[User:Spielman|Spielman]] 16:51, 13 April 2012 (EDT)
 +
 +
:Where is the contradiction?  If the exponent in Newtonian gravity is slightly adjusted, then it predicts the Mercury precession.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:01, 13 April 2012 (EDT)
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, apieditor, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
126,281

edits

Navigation menu