Need to know the basic level of astronomy, in order to know that collecting data of stars - comparing data made at another time - can not be use to measure deviation of starlight. Measuring the angle in astronomy applies direct measuring and instantaneous. It doesn't matter using a sophisticated software, if doesn't meet requirements in the basic principle of scientific method in the field of astronomy; should be classified as a non-scientific.
.
Thank to Sir Isaac Newton
The idea of “a small telescope” or a sextant employing a movable mirror was first conceived by Isaac Newton in 1700. Workable instruments were made in 1730; sextant in this form has been in use for 250 years, and will be used into the foreseeable future. The name is derived from the Latin sextant, or sixth part of a circle. Due to the arrangement of the optic, the sextant will actually measure angles up to one third of a circle, or 120 degrees. The octants and quadrant are similar instruments, with ranges of 90 and 180 degrees.
A sextant can also be used to measure the lunar distance between the moon and another celestial object (such as a star or planet) in order to determine Greenwich Mean Time and hence longitude. The principle of the instrument was first implemented around 1730 by John Hadley (1682–1744) and Thomas Godfrey (1704–1749), but it was also found later in the unpublished writings of Isaac Newton (1643–1727)-(wikipedia.org)
On the first glance you might think that a sextant looks pretty complicated, but it really isn’t. There are only three basic parts, as shown in figure below, and the parts of the “small telesope” are clearly described on wikipedia.
The sextant is not dependent upon electricity, unlike many forms of modern telescopes, for example radio telescope. For these reasons, it is considered a practical tool for measuring altitude of celestial bodies in the sky and knowing the angle of their deviation.
The accuracy of the measurement by sextant is determined by three factors, the accuracy of time, the height of eye an observer from sea level, and the geographic position of the observer.
The most important things in the measurements by using a sextant are the speed in getting the result. In less than 5 minutes an expert in astronomy can accurately determine the actual position and the apparent position of 4 stars in the sky. Again, thank so much to Sir Isaac Newton!
And more importantly, ‘this game is fair’, in the sense that other people could easily test the accuracy of the results, using the same tools.
Sir Isaac Newton
Radio Telescope
What are Radio Telescopes? We use radio telescopes to study naturally occurring radio light from stars, galaxies, black holes, and other astronomical objects. We can also use them to transmit and reflect radio light off of planetary bodies in our solar system. These specially-designed telescopes observe the longest wavelengths of light, ranging from 1 millimeter to over 10 meters long. For comparison, visible light waves are only a few hundred nanometers long, and a nanometer is only 1/10,000th the thickness of a piece of paper!
Naturally-occurring radio waves are extremely weak by the time they reach us from space. A cell phone signal is a billion billion times more powerful than the cosmic waves our telescopes detect.(public.radio-telescopes)
Flying southward over the Very Large Array in central New Mexico shows the flatness of the Plains of San Agustin where the array is sited. At over 7,000-feet elevation, this ancient lakebed provides the space needed to lay 40 miles of double-track rails required to extend the VLA’s Y-shape to give us its highest resolution capability.
The farther we separate our radio antennas, the larger the telescope they mimic. The phase shifts they see are even greater, which means their narrower overlap is a finer detail view of the sky. With this level of accuracy, radio telescopes spread very far apart can pinpoint exact locations of radio objects in space, including distances from Earth. We call this system Very Long Baseline Interferometry, or VLBI for short. The Very Long Baseline Array (VLBA) is the world’s largest VLBI system dedicated to full-time research.
From the above discussion and knowing how the radio telescope works, we can imagine the difficulty to measure the deviation of starlight using radio telescope. It’s about the precession of angle, not just an image of the objects.
The main problem is the weak incoming signal, and the other difficulty the observations can not be done just once, but many times, and maybe 1000 times of observations. Obviously, needs a long time.
We’ll probably never really know the computer sophisticated software of VLBI. As we know, it is very difficult to improve the resolution of the telescope only by increasing the size of the incoming radio waves; disturbances in the atmosphere limit the resolution of radio telescope. Radio telescope should be taking into account the effect of refraction and aberration of light (radio waves) depending on elevation of location of the radio telescope.
"According to Will, an analysis in 2004 of over 2 million VBLI observations has shown that the ratio of the actual observed deflections to the deflections predicted by general relativity is 0.99992 ± 0.00023. Thus the dramatic announcement of 1919 has been retro-actively justified."(www.mathpages.com).
This website informs about the difficulty of performing precise measurements of optical starlight deflection during an eclipse; can be gathered from the following list of results:
Over two million VBLI observations! Of course, there is lot of angle of incidence the incoming radio waves. This is very surprising and amazing.But, is this ‘a fair game’ in the sense that no other people could easily test the accuracy of the results, using the same tools?
This claims actually useless. That is something logical fallacy: argumentum ad lap idem-dismissing a claim as absurd without demonstrating proof for its absurdity.
Last but not least, a lot of details about the bending of light, but does not explain the bending of light as seen from space or from the Earth:
Deflection and Delay of Light. Everybody knows that light travels in straight lines, but while that is its natural tendency light can be deflected by lenses, mirrors, and by gravitational fields. Newtonian mechanics predicts that a particle traveling at the speed of light which just grazes the edge of the Sun will be deflected by 0.875 seconds of arc. That means that the image we see of a star will be displaced away from the Sun by this angle. The figure below shows this with the black showing the situation when the Sun is not close to the star. When the Sun is nearly blocking the star its image is deflected outward giving the red image. This Newtonian model also predicts that the gravitational attraction of the Sun will make light travel faster close to the Sun, so according to Newton the deflected light arrives before the undeflected light. The figure shows the red light pulse arriving before the black light pulse. Of course the travel time for starlight is very hard to measure, and the deflection of starlight can only be measured during a total eclipse of the Sun. The deflection angle is actually very small, and in the figure it has been increased by a factor of nearly 10,000 for clarity.(www.astro.ucla.edu)
From the above website we can read a statement:
General Relativity Wins Again. 17 Sep 2009 — Today’s Nature has a letter explaining the anomalous precession of the orbit of DI Herculis by Albrecht et al. 2009, Nature, 461, 373. A preprint is also available. It turns out that the spin axes of the stars are quite mis-aligned with the orbit, leading to tidal torques that explain why the precession was slower than the prediction of General Relativity.
General Relativity Wins Again. 17 Sep 2009 — Today’s Nature has a letter explaining the anomalous precession of the orbit of DI Herculis by Albrecht et al. 2009, Nature, 461, 373. A preprint is also available. It turns out that the spin axes of the stars are quite mis-aligned with the orbit, leading to tidal torques that explain why the precession was slower than the prediction of General Relativity.
‘General Relativity Wins Again’, this is also something logical fallacy : argumentum ad lap idem-dismissing a claim as absurd without demonstrating proof for its absurdity (This claim doesn’t demonstrated Newton’s gravity is wrong)..
General relativity wins again, it means Einstein's theory of gravity (nothing about force) is right and Newton's theory of gravity ( a force ) is wrong. Logically, they should be able to say Newton's gravity is wrong, and show proof about it. If not, it means nonsense.
Your College Degree is Worthless
This is not a judge
About binary pair stars (Binary Pulsars)
Such phenomena was said provide an excellent system for testing general relativity or just as general relativity predicts it should. Unfortunately, such phenomena is caused by the occurrence of refraction and aberration of starlight (Optical phenomena)
Binary Pulsars
1.“A test of general relativity from the three-dimensional orbital geometry of a binary pulsar Binary pulsars provide an excellent system for testing general relativity because of their intrinsic rotational stability and the precision with which radio observations can be used to determine their orbital dynamics. Measurements of the rate of orbital decay of two pulsars have been shown1, 2 to be consistent with the emission of gravitational waves as predicted by general relativity, but independent verification was not possible. Such verification can in principle be obtained by determining the orbital inclination in a binary pulsar system using only classical geometrical constraints. This would permit a measurement of the expected retardation of the pulse signal arising from the general relativistic curvature of space-time in the vicinity of the companion object (the ‘Shapiro delay’). Here we report high-precision radio observations of the binary millisecond pulsar PSR J0437–4715, which establish the three-dimensional structure of its orbit. We see the Shapiro delay predicted by general relativity, and we determine the mass of the neutron star and its white dwarf companion. The determination of such masses is necessary in order to understand the origin and evolution of neutron stars3.”
2.Hulse and Taylor won the Nobel prize in 1993 for careful observations of a binary neutron star which is slowly spiraling down, just as general relativity predicts it should, as it loses energy by emitting gravitational radiation.
Binary pulsars nothing to do with Einstein’s relativity
1.In fact, Shapiro experiments without taking into account the effect of Earth’s atmosphere. It’s not time dilation predicted by general relativity, but the effects of aberration of light to change with time. Radio telescope as an observer at the Earth should be taking into account the effect of layer of Earth’s atmosphere (refraction, aberration, density, and pressure).
Such phenomena is caused by the occurrence of refraction and aberration of starlight (Optcal pulsar). Binary pulsars nothing to do with Einstein’s relativity.
Optical Pulsar. An optical pulsar is a pulsar which can be detected in the visible spectrum.
“A Pulsar Discovery: First Optical Pulsar.” Moments of Discovery, American Institute of Physics, 2007 (Includes audio and teachers guides).
2.Binary pulsars nothing to do with Einstein’s relativity. The Nobel Prize in Physics 1993 was awarded jointly to Russell A. Hulse and Joseph H. Taylor Jr. "for the discovery of a new type of pulsar, a discovery that has opened up new possibilities for the study of gravitation"
