Requiem for Relativity

"Super Rare Event" Jupiter Grazes The Moon Photos
December 7th, 2004 - Early Morning Hours
7-Mile Bridge - The Florida Keys
www.mthurricane.com/jupter_graze.htm

"Jupiter is now grazing the moon ! Half of Jupiter is eclipsed by the moon. Jupiter can faintly be seen in and out for the next 2 minutes as it's light shines across the moons rocky surface. "

If we analyze the occultation at 7-Mile Bridge using Stellarium, then Jupiter should be hiding behind the Moon.
If we reposition Stellarium towards a position 99 miles in the same direction as indicated above, then we observe Jupiter grazing the Moon...

Taking into account the angle between the surface of the Earth and the direction of observation, the 159 km is reduced to 52 km (tangential to the direction of Moon and Jupiter).

The 52km over the distance from the Earth to the Moon corresponds to 28 arcsec.

The typical analogy that explains the Aberration of light is "Moving in the rain" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aberration_of_light

What is missing from this analogy is that certain raindrops, although coming from the exact same direction, would need to behave differently. (ic. the raindrops coming from the Moon): as these are not 'affected' by the aberration.

The other aspect missing from this analogy is that it does not explain why light that is behind the Moon can still be visible to us.

Considering figure 2 on en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aberration_of_light .
Light is not changing direction abruptly when entering the telescope, but must be gradually changing direction long before it reaches the telescope...

Bart, Does all this data indicate anything about gravity as in the manner of Einstein's light bending idea?

For certain light is bended through the effect of gravity, but this effect is neglectable in comparison with the effect that goes along with aberration. What's interesting is that only the smaller effect is recognised and accepted. Accepting the larger effect obviously has many consequences ...

Bart, What are the "many consequences" of which you speak-what is obvious to you is clear as mud to me. I would guess we can assume very little of the data you are amassing is effected by gravity of the moon and maybe none of it is a gravity effect. Is that right or wrong?

The gravity of the moon has absolutely no effect: the magnitude and direction of Stellar Aberration (for stars) can be calculated with just the velocity of the observer relative to the direction of where the light is coming from.

The only thing that moon is doing:
- it is preventing light from getting through
- it provides us with a reference point in the sky of which we know that is not affected by stellar aberration (or at least minimally)

The fact that the velocity of the observer is the only parameter (next to the speed of light) that plays a role did lead to the 'obvious' conclusion that stellar aberration must be occuring nearby the observer. If we claim that stellar aberration cannot happen near the observer, then there must be 'something else' that shares the velocity of the observer (Earth) and this 'something else' must be carrying light.

Accepting a light-carrying medium has "many consequences" as it triggers too many unanswered questions ...