My point was that flaws in Eddington’s experiments are infinitesimally weak evidence of flaws in GR. I have no opinion on successors to the theory.
Ooops, you are violating the conservation of expected evidence.
My point was that flaws in Eddington’s experiments are infinitesimally weak evidence of flaws in GR. I have no opinion on successors to the theory.
Ooops, you are violating the conservation of expected evidence.