Early in the article, we get a discussion of the precession of Mercury, known for centuries. Then:
> (In this context, Newtonian mechanics gives such a good approximation of reality that these models don’t need to consider the effects of general relativity.)
But wasn't the precession of Mercury already known to be inadequately explained by Newtonian gravity, even before Einstein?
> (In this context, Newtonian mechanics gives such a good approximation of reality that these models don’t need to consider the effects of general relativity.)
But wasn't the precession of Mercury already known to be inadequately explained by Newtonian gravity, even before Einstein?