|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
FALLING LIGHT IN EINSTEINIANA'S SCHIZOPHRENIC WORLD
http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/hsr1...notes12_02.pdf
Harvey Reall, University of Cambridge: "...light falls in the gravitational field in exactly the same way as a massive test particle." http://membres.multimania.fr/juvastr...s/einstein.pdf "Le principe d'équivalence, un des fondements de base de la relativité générale prédit que dans un champ gravitationnel, la lumière tombe comme tout corps matériel selon l'acceleration de la pesanteur." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNWngpw2vr0 Brian Cox: "Light falls at the same rate in a gravitational field as everything else." The speed of cannonballs shot downwards with initial speed v (relative to the shooter) varies with the gravitational potential (gh) in accordance with the equation (it is assumed that v(v'-v) and air friction is ignored): v' = v(1+(gh)/v^2) The speed of light emitted downwards with initial speed c (relative to the emitter) varies with the gravitational potential (gh) in accordance with one of the following equations: (1) c' = c(1+(gh)/c^2): Newton's emission theory of light. (2) c' = c(1+2(gh)/c^2): Einstein's general relativity. (3) c' = c: Stephen Hawking. The frequency of light emitted downwards with initial frequency f varies with the gravitational potential (gh) in accordance with the equation: f' = f(1+(gh)/c^2) This equation was confirmed experimentally by Pound and Rebka in 1960. It is obviously compatible with (1) and incompatible with (2) and (3). In Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world the Pound-Rebka experiment is just one of the glorious confirmations of Divine Albert's Divine Theory. Stephen Hawking is the Albert Einstein of our times. Newton's emission theory has been refuted and forgotten. Pentcho Valev |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
FALLING LIGHT IN EINSTEINIANA'S SCHIZOPHRENIC WORLD
The "inconsistent" theory of Isaac Newton:
http://www.amazon.com/Brief-History-.../dp/0553380168 Stephen Hawking, "A Brief History of Time", Chapter 6: "Under the theory that light is made up of waves, it was not clear how it would respond to gravity. But if light is composed of particles, one might expect them to be affected by gravity in the same way that cannonballs, rockets, and planets are. (...) In fact, it is not really consistent to treat light like cannonballs in Newton's theory of gravity because the speed of light is fixed. (A cannonball fired upward from the earth will be slowed down by gravity and will eventually stop and fall back; a photon, however, must continue upward at a constant speed...)" Newton's emission theory says that the speed of light varies with the gravitational potential (gh) in accordance with the equation c'=c(1+gh/ c^2). This, combined with the formula: (frequency) = (speed of light)/(wavelength) leads to the expectation of a frequency shift of gh/c^2. And yes, the Pound-Rebka experiment confirmed this expectation. How was this possible if "it is not really consistent to treat light like cannonballs in Newton's theory of gravity because the speed of light is fixed"? Pentcho Valev |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
FALLING LIGHT IN EINSTEINIANA'S SCHIZOPHRENIC WORLD
The Pound-Rebka experiment demonstrated that the frequency of light
varies with the gravitational potential (gh) in accordance with the equation: f' = f(1+gh/c^2) In order to account for this frequency shift without violating the principle of constancy of the speed of light, Einsteinians teach that the clock on a tower of height h is running fast (compared to a clock on the ground) by a factor (1+gh/c^2). However there is an implication in this camouflage that often makes clever Einsteinians wake up in a cold sweat. If the gravitational time dilation is a true concept, then, in accordance with the formula: (frequency) = (speed of light)/(wavelength) the wavelength does not vary with the gravitational potential. That is, the gravitational time dilation Einsteinians introduce completely neutralizes the frequency shift so that any variation of the wavelength would disturb the precious constancy of the speed of light. Things get even worse when the principle of equivalence is applied: now the lack of wavelength change accompanying the gravitational redshift becomes a lack of wavelength change accompanying the Doppler effect, when emitter and observer just move relative to one another in the absence of any gravitational field. In a world different from Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world such a "lack of wavelength change" would be synonymous to "Einstein's relativity is unthinkable". Pentcho Valev |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
FALLING LIGHT IN EINSTEINIANA'S SCHIZOPHRENIC WORLD
Gravitational redshift: theoretical predictions.
The top of a tower of height h emits light towards the grounds. The emitter MEASURES frequency f, wavelength L and speed of light c. The receiver (on the ground) MEASURES frequency f', wavelength L' and speed of light c'. Clocks used by the emitter and the receiver are "of identical constitution". Newton's emission theory of light: f'=f(1+gh/c^2); L'=L; c'=c(1+gh/c^2). Einstein 1911: f'=f(1+gh/c^2); L'=L; c'=c. Einstein 1915 (general relativity): f'=f(1+gh/c^2); L'=?; c'=c(1+2gh/c^2). Note that, if Einstein's 1911 predictions are true, the formula: (frequency) = (speed of light)/(wavelength) is invalid. The same seems to hold true for Einstein's 1915 predictions but, for a definitive conclusion, the explicit variation of the wavelength with the gravitational potential is needed. Pentcho Valev |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
FALLING LIGHT IN EINSTEINIANA'S SCHIZOPHRENIC WORLD
On Dec 14, 4:37 pm, Tom Roberts wrote in
sci.physics.relativity: On 12/14/11 12/14/11 1:30 AM, Pentcho Valev wrote: Gravitational redshift: theoretical predictions. Einstein 1915 (general relativity): f'=f(1+gh/c^2); L'=?; c'=c(1+2gh/c^2). Wrong. GR predicts (to first order in small quantities): f'=f(1+gh/c^2); L'=f(1-gh/c^2); c'=c These quantities are what a LOCAL observer would measure... Honest Roberts, Your "LOCAL observer" is just a silly red herring you have been repeating for many years. Try to concentrate on the variable speed of light Einstein himself speaks about. As superior brother Steve Carlip explains to you, "this interpretation is perfectly valid and makes good physical sense": http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic..._of_light.html Steve Carlip: "Einstein went on to discover a more general theory of relativity which explained gravity in terms of curved spacetime, and he talked about the speed of light changing in this new theory. In the 1920 book "Relativity: the special and general theory" he wrote: "...according to the general theory of relativity, the law of the constancy of the velocity of light in vacuo, which constitutes one of the two fundamental assumptions in the special theory of relativity [...] cannot claim any unlimited validity. A curvature of rays of light can only take place when the velocity of propagation of light varies with position." Since Einstein talks of velocity (a vector quantity: speed with direction) rather than speed alone, it is not clear that he meant the speed will change, but the reference to special relativity suggests that he did mean so. This interpretation is perfectly valid and makes good physical sense, but a more modern interpretation is that the speed of light is constant in general relativity." Don't be misled, Honest Roberts, by the last words of superior brother Steve Carlip - he just practices doublethink: http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com/1984-17 George Orwell: "Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. The Party intellectual knows in which direction his memories must be altered; he therefore knows that he is playing tricks with reality; but by the exercise of doublethink he also satisfies himself that reality is not violated. The process has to be conscious, or it would not be carried out with sufficient precision, but it also has to be unconscious, or it would bring with it a feeling of falsity and hence of guilt. Doublethink lies at the very heart of Ingsoc, since the essential act of the Party is to use conscious deception while retaining the firmness of purpose that goes with complete honesty. To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies - all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge ; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth. (...) It need hardly be said that the subtlest practitioners of doublethink are those who invented doublethink and know that it is a vast system of mental cheating. In our society, those who have the best knowledge of what is happening are also those who are furthest from seeing the world as it is. In general, the greater the understanding, the greater the delusion ; the more intelligent, the less sane." Pentcho Valev |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
FALLING LIGHT IN EINSTEINIANA'S SCHIZOPHRENIC WORLD
In Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world, the Michelson-Morley experiment
refutes the Michell-Laplace (emission) theory: 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." In a world different from Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world, the Michelson-Morley experiment would confirm the Michell-Laplace (emission) theory: http://www.amazon.com/Relativity-Its.../dp/0486406768 "Relativity and Its Roots" By Banesh Hoffmann: "Moreover, if light consists of particles, as Einstein had suggested in his paper submitted just thirteen weeks before this one, the second principle seems absurd: A stone thrown from a speeding train can do far more damage than one thrown from a train at rest; the speed of the particle is not independent of the motion of the object emitting it. And if we take light to consist of particles and assume that these particles obey Newton's laws, they will conform to Newtonian relativity and thus automatically account for the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment without recourse to contracting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations. Yet, as we have seen, Einstein resisted the temptation to account for the null result in terms of particles of light and simple, familiar Newtonian ideas, and introduced as his second postulate something that was more or less obvious when thought of in terms of waves in an ether." Pentcho Valev |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
FALLING LIGHT IN EINSTEINIANA'S SCHIZOPHRENIC WORLD
In Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world, the Pound-Rebka experiment
gloriously confirmed Divine Albert's Divine Theory: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound%E...bka_experiment "The Pound-Rebka experiment is a well known experiment to test Albert Einstein's theory of general relativity. (...) It is considered to be the experiment that ushered in an era of precision tests of general relativity." In a world different from Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world, the Pound-Rebka experiment would have confirmed the Michell-Laplace emission theory in the first place: http://www.springerlink.com/content/l720v8hv51p290gt/ Einstein and the Changing Worldviews of Physics, Einstein Studies, 2012, Volume 12, Part 1, 23-37 The Newtonian Theory of Light Propagation, Jean Eisenstaedt "...the gravitational Doppler effect (also called the gravitational displacement of line rays) discovered by Michell in 1784 is quantitatively the same as Einstein's." Pentcho Valev |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
FALLING LIGHT IN EINSTEINIANA'S SCHIZOPHRENIC WORLD
Antirelativists claim that Einsteinians interpret the result of the
Pound-Rebka experiment in terms of the Michell-Laplace emission theory: http://www.circlon-theory.com/HTML/poundRebka.html "The Pound-Rebka Experiment is quite complex in its technical details but in principle it is very simple. Photons of a precisely determined wavelength were emitted at the top and bottom of the 22.5-meter-high Jefferson Tower on the Harvard campus. (...) Proponents of the theory of General Relativity offer three different conflicting explanations of these results that are said to be equivalent to each other and therefore all equally correct. (...) In the drawing of tower #2, the photons are emitted at a wavelength of exactly one (=1) that remains constant as they move through the gravitational "field." However, as they move thorough this field, the photons "fall" toward the earth like any other material body, so that the descending photons move at speeds increasingly greater than C, and the ascending photons move at decreasing speeds of less than C." Do antirelativists lie and unjustly accuse Einsteinians of being inconsistent? They don't - such interpretations could be seen in the past - but at present search in Internet would show no signs of interpreting the Pound-Rebka experiment in terms of the emission theory: http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com/1984-4 George Orwell: "The messages he had received referred to articles or news items which for one reason or another it was thought necessary to alter, or, as the official phrase had it, to rectify. For example, it appeared from the Times of the seventeenth of March that Big Brother, in his speech of the previous day, had predicted that the South Indian front would remain quiet but that a Eurasian offensive would shortly be launched in North Africa. As it happened, the Eurasian Higher Command had launched its offensive in South India and left North Africa alone. It was therefore necessary to rewrite a paragraph of Big Brother's speech, in such a way as to make him predict the thing that had actually happened. Or again, the Times of the nineteenth of December had published the official forecasts of the output of various classes of consumption goods in the fourth quarter of 1983, which was also the sixth quarter of the Ninth Three-Year Plan. Today's issue contained a statement of the actual output, from which it appeared that the forecasts were in every instance grossly wrong. Winston's job was to rectify the original figures by making them agree with the later ones. As for the third message, it referred to a very simple error which could be set right in a couple of minutes. As short a time ago as February, the Ministry of Plenty had issued a promise (a "categorical pledge" were the official words) that there would be no reduction of the chocolate ration during 1984. Actually, as Winston was aware, the chocolate ration was to be reduced from thirty grammes to twenty at the end of the present week. All that was needed was to substitute for the original promise a warning that it would probably be necessary to reduce the ration at some time in April." Pentcho Valev |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
ZOMBIE EDUCATION IN EINSTEINIANA'S SCHIZOPHRENIC WORLD | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 9 | August 1st 11 06:43 AM |
GUILTY CONSCIENCE IN EINSTEINIANA'S SCHIZOPHRENIC WORLD | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 7 | July 16th 11 06:31 AM |
SANITY IN EINSTEINIANA'S SCHISOPHRENIC WORLD | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 11 | June 8th 11 08:43 AM |
EINSTEINIANA'S SCHIZOPHRENIC WORLD | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 14 | June 8th 11 08:08 AM |
HOW EINSTEINIANS CAN LEAVE THEIR SCHIZOPHRENIC WORLD | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 4 | July 22nd 09 09:56 AM |