Perimeter conference on black holes and quantum physics withrecorded talks

On Jan 31, 6:11*am, Melroy wrote in
sci.physics.relativity:
See http://www.pirsa.org/C09002
Lots of interesting talks.

If John Michell and Pierre Laplace had known the deep truths that
today's Einsteinians know, they would have developed the theory of
black holes. Unfortunately John Michell and Pierre Laplace knew no
deep truth so the theory of black holes can only be developed by
Einsteiniana's geniuses:

http://www.hawking.org.uk/index.php?...64&It emid=66
Stephen Hawking: "Interestingly enough, Laplace himself wrote a paper
in 1799 on how some stars could have a gravitational field so strong
that light could not escape, but would be dragged back onto the star.
He even calculated that a star of the same density as the Sun, but two
hundred and fifty times the size, would have this property. But
although Laplace may not have realised it, the same idea had been put
forward 16 years earlier by a Cambridge man, John Mitchell, in a paper
in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. Both Mitchell
and Laplace thought of light as consisting of particles, rather like
cannon balls, that could be slowed down by gravity, and made to fall
back on the star. But a famous experiment, carried out by two
Americans, Michelson and Morley in 1887, showed that light always
travelled at a speed of one hundred and eighty six thousand miles a
second, no matter where it came from. How then could gravity slow down
light, and make it fall back."

http://admin.wadsworth.com/resource_...Ch01-Essay.pdf
Clifford Will: "The first glimmerings of the black hole idea date to
the 18th century, in the writings of a British amateur astronomer, the
Reverend John Michell. Reasoning on the basis of the corpuscular
theory that light would be attracted by gravity, he noted that the
speed of light emitted from the surface of a massive body would be
reduced by the time the light was very far from the source. (Michell
of course did not know special relativity.)"

http://www.tutorgig.com/ed/Einstein_shift
"The gravitational weakening of light from high-gravity stars was
predicted by John Michell in 1783 and Pierre-Simon Laplace in 1796,
using Isaac Newton's concept of light corpuscles (see: emission
theory) and who predicted that some stars would have a gravity so
strong that light would not be able to escape. The effect of gravity
on light was then explored by Johann Georg von Soldner (1801), who
calculated the amount of deflection of a light ray by the sun,
arriving at the Newtonian answer which is half the value predicted by
general relativity. All of this early work assumed that light could
slow down and fall, which was inconsistent with the modern
understanding of light waves. Once it became accepted that light is an
electromagnetic wave, it was clear that the frequency of light should
not change from place to place, since waves from a source with a fixed
frequency keep the same frequency everywhere. The only way around this
conclusion would be if time itself was altered--- if clocks at
different points had different rates. This was precisely Einstein's
conclusion in 1911. He considered an accelerating box, and noted that
according to the special theory of relativity, the clock rate at the
bottom of the box was slower than the clock rate at the top."

Pentcho Valev

How then could gravity slow down light, and make it fall back.

Light does not lift. Space is curved, the geodesic path changes with
red shifts in gravitational fields.4

I once wrote to you how it can be figured out how this multi-
dimensionality
works. Not even gravity is fixed. There is an underlieing flux of
relative forces
where things break down and can break down in mechanical physics
level. www.NewDirectionEurope.com/dark_matter

You take distance and how light travels back and forth with near
the speed of light. Say a star explodes and throws matter toward us.
The explosion happened 10 years ago. So 10 years later we see
the light. The Michelson and Morley experiment showed that light
travels at the speed of light. Einstein showed that time does not
travel with the same speed. So we receive the signal that the star
exploded 10 years later, we observe this light traveling from the star
to Earth from a third point of observation where we see that it took
10 years for this light to reach Earth. The third observation point
also sees mass thrown and traveling near the speed of light
toward Earth not far behind the first light signal. What does Earth
see? First the light. Based on this it appears that soon the mass
should hit Earth. But Einstein said something: nothing can travel
faster than light. This means that looking at the telescopes, the
star appears to have exploded and mass emerged in the distance
being thrown from the star. The star in the telescope seems in
its early stages of explosion and nothing seems to be different
than seeing what happened 10 years ago with an early stage
explosion being localized 10 light years away. Telescopes show
how the mass is leaving that star with near the speed of light.
So 10 more years pass by the time according to the telescopes
the mass hits Earth. In the relative frame the event never happened
until it is seen, and then the event unfolds. There is this
relativistic
distribution of time and things. Light seems to be instant in that
world, though light has a speed if timed. Time itself is delayed
everywhere.

This phenomena has other effects, one of them is that the Universe
must expand from this delay of events. Time acts as a force, this
force creates distances, this is dark energy. Things relativistically
fade away in the Universe.

This relativity needs to be studied in black holes. It is possible to
explain relativity without equations in science in the form that
an apple is a round object. Things delay and decay relativistically.
The lost energy from a relativistic decay transformes into dark
energy forces. This is how black holes decay too, well, black
holes are different in the multitudes of forces than just that. Things
decay in time. One of the things that decays is light, it was shown
that there is a redshift everywhere in the Universe. A second effect
exists, light looses half the intensity as if all things were twice as
far, this is not red or blue shift but things are fainter, precisely
half
as faint as they should be. All light in the Universe is half as
faint.
Nobody knows yet why that is. If there would be particles everywhere
causing this, distant objects would blur away. Yet distant objects
too appear half as faint.

Now if we follow the experiment of what happens when the Sun
released light 10 years ago in one calculation, but after seeing the
first light of the explosion and seeing the mass traveling toward
Earth for another 10 years before it hits Earth, we get double the
time frame, which means light traveled for 20 years and looses
half the intensity in all distant objects. This is relativity. Nothing
can travel faster than light. These things were even figured out
based on relativity that light in its frame travels instantly. This
is like the fifth time I am telling you this.