• Sci.Astro.research: Evidence that Cassini did not test for refraction.

    From Lou@21:1/5 to All on Mon Feb 7 05:18:36 2022
    On Monday, 25 October 2021 at 15:48:53 UTC+1, hitwrote:
    On Tuesday, October 19, 2021 at 12:02:26 AM UTC-6, zac wrote:

    An article about Black Holes, Neutron Stars, Fusion, Electromagnetism and Gravity.

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-o08Dao8HJhwgJH-09vzHwvinhwbfKTOY6_gWmpXWPg/edit?usp=sharing

    The article is 38 pages long in print format of font size 11.
    38 pages may seem daunting, but lot of the space is taken up by
    relevant images that express the ideas.
    This article is highly speculative, but for good reason since it is of things that show anomalies in the
    standard model. Take your time while reading it to give it some
    thought before you comment.

    I haven't read the whole thing, only up to page 8. But I found a
    problem on the FIRST page:

    He's blaming light bending around the sun on refraction of the corona.
    He has NO calculation of how big that would be: scientists have, and
    it's not nearly big enough. Besides that, Cassini measured the angle at
    two different frequencies because refraction due to the corona is frequency-dependent. Their results disagreed with refraction on two
    counts.

    Based on this, I don't believe he thinks deeply enough. Besides, I have
    my own biases :-)

    Gary

    [Moderator's note: Indeed. I glanced over it and there are several questionable things in it. On the whole, I would say that it is too speculative. -P.H.]
    Sci.astro.research Moderators seem unable to understand that
    the Definitive paper on the Cassini data does not specify ANY
    test for refraction.
    In fact as the papers authors, Bertotti et al 2003 admit in section
    3.1, the two seperate frequencies measured for time delay
    by Cassini had to be combined together using algorithms
    because each frequency on its own was too messy due to
    intense coronal variation. In other words data from each
    channel was not ever even available for testing of refraction.
    The only people making speculative assertions based on false
    assumptions appear to be Gary and the sci.Astro.research
    moderators.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)