EINSTEINIANS INADVERTENTLY TEACH VARIABLE SPEED OF LIGHT

http://www.personal.kent.edu/~fwilli...Relativity.pdf
David Morin: "A light source on top of a tower of height h emits flashes at time intervals Ts. A receiver on the ground receives the flashes at time intervals Tr. What is Tr in terms of Ts?"

Morin deduces:

Tr = Ts/(1 + v/c)

which means that the speed of the light as measured by the receiver is:

c' = d/Tr = (d/Ts)(1 + v/c) = c(1 + gh/c^2)

where d is the distance between the flashes and c=d/Ts is the initial speed of the light (as measured by the source).

The variation c'=c(1+gh/c^2) is numerically identical to that predicted by Newton's emission theory of light. However according to the emission theory light accelerates as it falls (like any falling body) while in Morin's scenario the light does not accelerate - the variation c'=c(1+gh/c^2) is due to gravitational time dilation (clocks on the ground run slow).

Pentcho Valev

http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/doppler
Albert Einstein Institute: "The frequency of a wave-like signal - such as sound or light - depends on the movement of the sender and of the receiver. This is known as the Doppler effect. (...) Here is an animation of the receiver moving towards the source: (...) By observing the two indicator lights, you can see for yourself that, once more, there is a blue-shift - the pulse frequency measured at the receiver is somewhat higher than the frequency with which the pulses are sent out. This time, the distances between subsequent pulses are not affected, but still there is a frequency shift: As the receiver moves towards each pulse, the time until pulse and receiver meet up is shortened. In this particular animation, which has the receiver moving towards the source at one third the speed of the pulses themselves, four pulses are received in the time it takes the source to emit three pulses."

Since "the distances between subsequent pulses are not affected", and since "four pulses are received in the time it takes the source to emit three pulses", the speed of the light as measured by the receiver is:

c' = 4d/t = (4/3)(3d/t) = (4/3)c

where d is the distance between subsequent pulses, t is "the time it takes the source to emit three pulses", and c=3d/t is the initial speed of the light (as measured by the source).

Pentcho Valev

http://www.einstein-online.info/spot...t_white_dwarfs
Albert Einstein Institute: "One of the three classical tests for general relativity is the gravitational redshift of light or other forms of electromagnetic radiation. However, in contrast to the other two tests - the gravitational deflection of light and the relativistic perihelion shift -, you do not need general relativity to derive the correct prediction for the gravitational redshift. A combination of Newtonian gravity, a particle theory of light, and the weak equivalence principle (gravitating mass equals inertial mass) suffices. (...) The gravitational redshift was first measured on earth in 1960-65 by Pound, Rebka, and Snider at Harvard University..."

This means that, if the top of a tower of height h emits light with frequency f, speed c and wavelength L (f=c/L), an observer on the ground will measure the frequency f', the speed of the light c' and the wavelength L' to be:

f'=f(1+gh/c^2) (confirmed by Pound and Rebka)

c' = c(1+gh/c^2)

L' = c'/f' = L

as predicted by Newton's emission theory of light. Any different prediction for f', c' and L' can be shown to be implausible, for one reason or another.

The speed of light varies in a gravitational field exactly as predicted by Newton's emission theory of light:

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://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJ2SVPahBzg
"The light is perceived to be falling in a gravitational field just like a mechanical object would."

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."

Pentcho Valev