Is Einstein Wrong - Revision history

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2017-01-02T02:39:05Z

Imported from text file

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:39, 1 January 2017
Line 15:		Line 15:
	[[Category:Scientific Paper\|einstein wrong]]		[[Category:Scientific Paper\|einstein wrong]]

	[[Category:Relativity]]		[[Category:Relativity\|einstein wrong]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2017-01-01T17:35:23Z

Imported from text file

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:35, 1 January 2017
Line 11:		Line 11:
	==Abstract==		==Abstract==

	Forum, V71, N6, pp. 705-716 (June 1924). A Professor of Celestial Mechanics maintains thay Einstein's theory of relativity has not been proved, unless we accept on faith the special pleadings and assumptions of his followers. He calls attention to the wide divergence between stellar positions predicted by Einstein and the actual positions observed at the time of eclipses, and he argues that Newton's conclusions can be equally well vindicated if Newtonians permit themselves similar liberties in explaining away embarrassing facts.[[Category:Scientific Paper]]		Forum, V71, N6, pp. 705-716 (June 1924). A Professor of Celestial Mechanics maintains thay Einstein's theory of relativity has not been proved, unless we accept on faith the special pleadings and assumptions of his followers. He calls attention to the wide divergence between stellar positions predicted by Einstein and the actual positions observed at the time of eclipses, and he argues that Newton's conclusions can be equally well vindicated if Newtonians permit themselves similar liberties in explaining away embarrassing facts.

			[[Category:Scientific Paper\|einstein wrong]]

	[[Category:Relativity]]		[[Category:Relativity]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2016-12-30T13:43:11Z

Imported from text file

New page

{{Infobox paper
| title = Is Einstein Wrong
| url = [http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_294.pdf Link to paper]
| author = [[Charles Lane Poor]]
| published = 1924
| num_pages = 12
}}

'''Read the full paper''' [http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_294.pdf here]

==Abstract==

Forum, V71, N6, pp. 705-716 (June 1924). A Professor of Celestial Mechanics maintains thay Einstein's theory of relativity has not been proved, unless we accept on faith the special pleadings and assumptions of his followers. He calls attention to the wide divergence between stellar positions predicted by Einstein and the actual positions observed at the time of eclipses, and he argues that Newton's conclusions can be equally well vindicated if Newtonians permit themselves similar liberties in explaining away embarrassing facts.[[Category:Scientific Paper]]

[[Category:Relativity]]