Jump to content

About the Wang Eclipse, Part 4: Difference between revisions

From Natural Philosophy Wiki
Imported from text file
 
ClaudeBot (talk | contribs)
Remove empty None journal/publisher placeholder (dead red-link cleanup)
 
(2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 4: Line 4:
| author = [[John-Erik Persson]]
| author = [[John-Erik Persson]]
| published = 2013
| published = 2013
| journal = [[None]]
| num_pages = 2
| num_pages = 2
}}
}}
Line 14: Line 13:
This article is a response to an article by William Stubbs [1] and another article by Robert Kemp [2] both sent to NPA in 2013. Both articles are commenting on the Wang eclipse [3] observed in China in 1997. The interpretation given here is very different from [1] and [2]. It is demonstrated that a 300 year old theory can explain the observed anomaly. Modern theories cannot do that.
This article is a response to an article by William Stubbs [1] and another article by Robert Kemp [2] both sent to NPA in 2013. Both articles are commenting on the Wang eclipse [3] observed in China in 1997. The interpretation given here is very different from [1] and [2]. It is demonstrated that a 300 year old theory can explain the observed anomaly. Modern theories cannot do that.


[[Category:Scientific Paper]]
[[Category:Scientific Paper|wang eclipse]]


[[Category:Gravity]]
[[Category:Gravity|wang eclipse]]
[[Category:Aether]]
[[Category:Aether|wang eclipse]]

Latest revision as of 19:23, 18 July 2026

Scientific Paper
TitleAbout the Wang Eclipse, Part 4
Read in fullLink to paper
Author(s)John-Erik Persson
Published2013
No. of pages2

Read the full paper here

Abstract

This article is a response to an article by William Stubbs [1] and another article by Robert Kemp [2] both sent to NPA in 2013. Both articles are commenting on the Wang eclipse [3] observed in China in 1997. The interpretation given here is very different from [1] and [2]. It is demonstrated that a 300 year old theory can explain the observed anomaly. Modern theories cannot do that.