General relativity explains the anomalous precession of Mercury's perihelion

the verdict

SUPPORTED

the evidence backs this

Recorded sources

2 sources for · 0 against

Counts group repeated records of the same source within each side. They do not measure evidence strength or source independence.

General relativity successfully accounts for the anomalous precession of Mercury's perihelion, a foundational triumph confirmed by high-precision solar system measurements and tests of post-Newtonian gravity.

The analysis

The claim is a well-established empirical fact in physics. Papers [0] and [4] explicitly discuss tests of general relativity including the perihelion advance of Mercury and solar system measurements that confirm the theory. No papers refute the claim.

Evidence for · 2

The Confrontation between General Relativity and Experiment.

Recorded source metadata

Will CM. The Confrontation between General Relativity and Experiment.. 2014. https://doi.org/10.12942/lrr-2014-4

The review details that tests of general relativity at the post-Newtonian level have achieved high precision, including specifically the perihelion advance of Mercury.

Source citation format

See more details

More for · 1

Solar system expansion and strong equivalence principle as seen by the NASA MESSENGER mission.

Recorded source metadata

Genova A, Mazarico E, Goossens S, Lemoine FG, Neumann GA, Smith DE, Zuber MT. Solar system expansion and strong equivalence principle as seen by the NASA MESSENGER mission.. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-02558-1

Data from the MESSENGER mission validate general relativity and its post-Newtonian parameters within the inner solar system.

Source citation format

The paper trail · every fact has a biography

first checked01 Aug 2026

judged → SUPPORTED · 8801 Aug 2026

More receipts

Is it true that Phonological evolution involves regular processes of phoneme elision, vowel nasalization, and tonogenesis?Is it true that Hemangiomas are treatable with medication?Is it true that Research identifies forms of intelligence that diverge from standard IQ measures?

Random receipt →The Trust Wiki →

Anyone with this link can read the claim and its public receipt, including any personal information in that text. Open permanent receipt.

Check your own claim

Challenge the receipt

I have a source that contradicts this verdict I have a source that supports it No source: request a receipt review Requests are recorded for review. This does not start an automatic check or guarantee a response time.

trust me, bro: win the argument, pass the class, survive peer review.

Citation formatting by citeproc-js (Frank Bennett) and the Citation Style Language project. Source and licenses.

This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work · Dispute this receipt