View Single Post
  #14  
Old June 14th 13, 01:26 AM posted to sci.astro
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default Photon Deflection

On Sunday, June 2, 2013 9:12:29 PM UTC-7, Koobee Wublee wrote:
Koobee Wublee wrote:



May 29 marked the anniversary date for Eddington’s dishonest


scientific ventures. In 1919, he was able to conclude a twice amount


to Newtonian prediction of corpuscle deflection where light corpuscles


are treated as classical particles (per Andro’s and Wilson’s belief).


Examining Eddington’s instrumentations, the accuracies are just not


there for him to conclude with the said accuracies. Koobee Wublee is


not going to dwell on these expeditions of Eddington’s but would like


to revisit if indeed GR, namely the Schwarzschild metric, does offer


the said twice amount over Newtonian prediction. So, hold on to your


hat. shrug




Say the Newtonian deflected amount is one nibble. Just what made


Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar conclude two nibbles


of deflection? Well, the nitwit argued that curved space would give


one nibble while gravitational time dilation would yield another one


--- thus two nibbles total. shrug




Imagine if there is no gravitational time dilation. Can a photon


traveling near the sun be observed to shift in position? If either


the photon or the observer is located well under the influence of


curved space, this will indeed be the case. However, if the photon


starts out and ends well outside of (flat space) the influence of


curved space, would the observed position still shift to indicate a


bending in the photon’s path? shrug




Koobee Wublee’s gut feeling is saying no and has mathematics to prove


that no such bending would take place if anyone is interested. Curved


space is like a lens with gradient index of refraction. The photon


will bend one way during the inbound trip (because space is getting


more and more curved) but unbends itself during the outbound trip


(because space is getting more and more flat). The result is no such


anomaly. shrug




However, introducing gravitational time dilation, it behaves more like


a force. Thus, a photon will bend with gravitational time dilation,


and the total amount of bending should just be one nibble rather than


two as erroneously calculated by the self-styled physicists in the


past 100 years. shrug




Although curved space does not cause any deflection in angle, it would


shift the ray of photons (starting and observed in flat space with


curved space in between) by an amount of (2 G M / c^2 / r). Combined


with an actual photon deflection due to gravitational time dilation


would be what Eddington had observed in 1919. shrug




Basically, we have the following regarding the Schwarzschild metric:




** Gravitational time dilation bends photons towards the sun with a


coherent angle the same as the Newtonian amount when treating light as


classical particles.




** Curved space shift the path of photo (starting and observed in


flat space with curved space in between) by an amount of (2 G M /


c^2 / r) towards the sun.




Actually, curved space should not result in any deflection at all if

the photon starts and is observed in flat space with curved space in

between. However, in flat space with a gradient index of refraction,

the path of the photon will be shift (not deflected) by an amount of

(2 G M / c^2) towards the sun according to Snell's law.



shrug




Oops! Bad science or bad mathematics? shrug




Just incompetence, no? shrug


We objectively know that photons exist, but do we have objective proof that individual photons move?