What is the speed of gravity?

[Rough Beast Sloucher]

Norton

Same here.

 

[Polymath257]

You certainly did not read the full article (properly if at all) which gives all the details.
It even explains minute aspects of error margins for Newtonian calculations.
(perhaps you are trying to get me to copy-paste my code so you can pass it off as your own?)

I assure you, I have no interest in stealing your code. I'm only pointing out the deficiencies in what you wrote.

The basic concept of gravity travelling at the velocity of light was a result of the field equations,
and not something in addition to it, as the quotes show in the starting post.

Consider this:

If gravity and light travel at the same velocity under the same laws of physics then they must both follow the same trajectory. So if your interpretation of the Relativity laws resulted in it appearing "as if" gravity had the same origin under Relativity as it would under Newton,
then light would also appear to be originating across the midpoint and it would thus be impossible to measure
the velocity of light by observing the moon's of Jupiter.

So if gravity follows a different path to light then it would be wrong to consider them
as having the same velocity, and operating under the same laws.

The logical errors you and almost every other theorist in the history of science and philosophy make
is to think that quoting esoteric jargon is the same as understanding. Its not.

You need to start by programming "triple orbit software" (or "multi-orbit software") on a purely Newtonian level.
You probably would like to scoff at this; thinking it is beneath you,
but I still see no evidence that you or anyone else fully understands how to do this.
n-body Newtonian gravity is certainly simpler than Relativity,
and yet Hawking clearly states:

(Brief History of Time)

Yes, there is no *exact* analytic solution for the three body problem in Newtonian physics. But there are *very* good approximations available for computer programs. This isn't 'beneath me'. In fact, I find the methods very interesting. But what you do isn't that.

So perhaps, see if you can jargonize your way out of the next basic problem, which no doubt you feel is no problem.
I am reminded of this by the other paper listed on this thread.

If a photon is moving away or towards my nose at the velocity of light,
then under the principles of Relativity, my nose is moving at a velocity of C in respect to the photon.

Thus, the laws of Special Relativity would result in my nose acquiring infinite mass as my nose
is relatively moving at the velocity of light when measured against the photon.

Seeing as though my nose clearly would not have infinite mass relative to the photon
it follows that special relativity simply is wrong.

Or that your understanding of it is. Guess which? The idea that mass increases with velocity has to do with the fact that the 'proper time' is used in the force law (the derivative of momentum is the force) when it can be used. But, for a photon, the proper time is zero, so coordinate time can be used if done properly. Technically, coordinate time can be used for matter also, but it is far easier to use proper time.

Saying 'you do not understand' over and over again, is not an explanation,
but an attempt to assert your ego, and nothing more.
This is the norm of atheist academia, as it always has been for countless millennia.

Well, your writing shows you don't understand. Sorry about that. You would fail even a middle level course in this stuff.