Edward Witten is unable to understand the Michelson-Morley experiment. In the video below, at 1:17, he teaches that the experiment confirmed the constant (independent of the speed of the source) speed of light posited by the ether theory, and disproved the variable (dependent on the speed of the source) speed of light posited by Newton's emission theory (actually the opposite was the case in 1887):

Edward Witten on modern physics https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnzLpyDsn3M

In 1919 Eddington was trying to find out which deflection - that predicted by Newton's theory or that predicted by Einstein's theory - was the true one. Yet Kip Thorne teaches that Newton's theory had predicted no deflection:

Kip Thorne: "A second crucial proof of the breakdown in Newtonian gravity was the relativistic bending of light. Einstein's theory predicted that starlight passing near the limb of the sun should be deflected by 1.75 seconds of arc, whereas NEWTON'S LAW PREDICTED NO DEFLECTION. Observations during the 1919 eclipse of the sun in Brazil, carried out by Sir Arthur Eddington and his British colleagues, brilliantly confirmed Einstein's prediction to an accuracy of about 20 percent. This dealt the final death blow to Newton's law and to most other relativistic theories of gravity." http://commons.erau.edu/cgi/viewcontent ... roceedings

Brothers Einsteinians don't rebuke Edward Witten and Kip Thorne - they admire the breathtaking ignorance of the two geniuses and give them all sorts of prizes.

Pentcho Valev

>>>In 1919 Eddington was trying to find out which deflection - that predicted by Newton's theory or that predicted by Einstein's theory - was the true one. Yet Kip Thorne teaches that Newton's theory had predicted no deflection

yes so Thorne contradicts Eddington.

But looking just at the math equations e.g. Newton gravitational force = GMm/r^2, and the other equations. Newtonian physics does not actually predict light bends under gravity; just under its equation for gravity it predicts that if light bends under a gravitational field then light has mass, and if it doesn't bend then it doesn't have mass. So, Eddington's observation of light bending means that Newtonian physics predicts that light has mass. BUT under Einstein's relativity often relativists will say light has no mass. So, if there was no Einstein's relativity, Eddington should have said he discovered light has mass!