A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

ABSURD BEHAVIOUR OF LIGHT IN GRAVITY



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 26th 14, 08:08 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default ABSURD BEHAVIOUR OF LIGHT IN GRAVITY

According to Einstein's relativity, as light is emitted by a source of gravity, its speed is initially low but then increases and reaches its maximum as the gravitational field becomes zero. Vice versa, if the light falls towards the source of gravity, its speed, unlike the speed of ordinary falling bodies, gradually DECREASES and reaches its lowest value at the surface of the source.

This prediction of Einstein's relativity is so absurd that Einsteinians either are silent about it or produce misleading statements (suggesting that, according to Einstein's relativity, the speed of falling light, like the speed of ordinary falling bodies, INCREASES):

http://sethi.lamar.edu/bahrim-cristi...t-lens_PPT.pdf
Dr. Cristian Bahrim: "If we accept the principle of equivalence, we must also accept that light falls in a gravitational field with the same acceleration as material bodies."

http://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/9909014v1.pdf
Steve Carlip: "It is well known that the deflection of light is twice that predicted by Newtonian theory; in this sense, at least, light falls with twice the acceleration of ordinary "slow" matter."

http://www.wfu.edu/~brehme/space.htm
Robert W. Brehme: "Light falls in a gravitational field just as do material objects."

http://courses.physics.illinois.edu/...ctures/l13.pdf
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign: "Consider a falling object. ITS SPEED INCREASES AS IT IS FALLING. Hence, if we were to associate a frequency with that object the frequency should increase accordingly as it falls to earth. Because of the equivalence between gravitational and inertial mass, WE SHOULD OBSERVE THE SAME EFFECT FOR LIGHT. So lets shine a light beam from the top of a very tall building. If we can measure the frequency shift as the light beam descends the building, we should be able to discern how gravity affects a falling light beam. This was done by Pound and Rebka in 1960. They shone a light from the top of the Jefferson tower at Harvard and measured the frequency shift. The frequency shift was tiny but in agreement with the theoretical prediction. Consider a light beam that is travelling away from a gravitational field. Its frequency should shift to lower values.. This is known as the gravitational red shift of light."

There are no more than ten sources on Internet dealing, more or less honestly, with the absurd prediction of Einstein's relativity (that the speed of falling light DECREASES):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJ2SVPahBzg
"Relativity 3 - gravity and light"

http://www.speed-light.info/speed_of_light_variable.htm
"Einstein wrote this paper in 1911 in German. (...) ...you will find in section 3 of that paper Einstein's derivation of the variable speed of light in a gravitational potential, eqn (3). The result is: c'=c0(1+Φ/c^2) where Φ is the gravitational potential relative to the point where the speed of light c0 is measured. Simply put: Light appears to travel slower in stronger gravitational fields (near bigger mass). (...) You can find a more sophisticated derivation later by Einstein (1955) from the full theory of general relativity in the weak field approximation. (...) Namely the 1955 approximation shows a variation in km/sec twice as much as first predicted in 1911."

http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s6-01/6-01.htm
"Specifically, Einstein wrote in 1911 that the speed of light at a place with the gravitational potential φ would be c(1+φ/c^2), where c is the nominal speed of light in the absence of gravity. In geometrical units we define c=1, so Einstein's 1911 formula can be written simply as c'=1+φ. However, this formula for the speed of light (not to mention this whole approach to gravity) turned out to be incorrect, as Einstein realized during the years leading up to 1915 and the completion of the general theory. (...) ...we have c_r =1+2φ, which corresponds to Einstein's 1911 equation, except that we have a factor of 2 instead of 1 on the potential term."

Pentcho Valev
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Dark Energy really is an Energy, not a different behaviour of Gravity Yousuf Khan[_2_] Astronomy Misc 22 May 22nd 11 11:24 PM
Why does light bend under gravity? Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 81 April 4th 08 01:17 PM
water behaviour Cyrus Space Shuttle 4 September 18th 06 01:22 AM
Van Allen belt behaviour... snidely Space Science Misc 1 September 13th 05 08:42 PM
Strange SETI behaviour Lucas SETI 4 May 17th 04 12:11 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.