On May 17, 8:55 am, Pentcho Valev wrote:
On Nov, 8, 2003, Harry (Tom Roberts' student) wrote in

I don't know what you are asking (if anything). But the Pound & Rebka
and Pound & Snider experiments clearly show that the frequency of an
emitted light beam as measured by a receiver depends upon the
respective heights of emitter and receiver in the gravitational field
of the earth.

This can be interpreted in several different ways:

1. Light loses energy as it rises, and gains energy as it falls down;
because for light E=hf this affects its frequency.

This is in direct analogy with massive particles (in that they gain/
lose energy as they fall/rise), But from other experiments (e.g.
rotating moessbauser experiments) it is clear that this is not the
whole story.

Energy is conserved. Light cannot lose any energy propagating out of
a gravitational field.

Also, energy is an observed quantity. It makes no sense to talk about
the energy of a photon under gravitational influence and out of.

2. Clocks tick slower when they are lower in a gravitational field
than when they are higher.

This is the typical elementary explanation. But from other experiments
it is clear that this is not the whole story.

If the speed of light is measured the same for one inside and outside
of gravitational influence, then this issue cannot explain
gravitational redshift.

If not measured the same, it is time to bury both SR and GR under 6
feet of nonsense build-up in the past 100 years or so.

3. Spacetime is curved in accordance with Einstein's field equation,
and light rays follow null geodesics.

The curvature of spacetime is more general than the field equations or
GR. The field equations define what the curvature is.

Which geodesic path does light travel since every possible path has
null geodesics?

To be more specific for example, if we have 4 numbers below.

** 0, 0, 0, 0

Which one of the four numbers above is greater than the others?

Elementary school children should have no problems answering this
one. However, physicists for 100 years seem to have so much trouble
understanding this one. WHY?

This is the GR approach, and it also explains the other experiments.
In the non-quantum domain so far this seems to be the whole story.

The current interpretation of GR is utterly absurd.

The bottom line is that GR cannot explain gravitational redshift
PERIOD