Relativity Principle Revisited

On 26 Aug, 15:48, Tom Roberts wrote in
sci.physics.relativity:
You forget that physics is a QUANTITATIVE science.
Tom Roberts

Isn't it a QUALITATIVE science sometimes Roberts Roberts? For
instance, QUALITATIVELY, you admit that the speed of light does vary
with the gravitational potential:

Tom Roberts wrote in sci.physics.relativity:
Pentcho Valev wrote:
CAN THE SPEED OF LIGHT EXCEED 300000 km/s IN A GRAVITATIONAL FIELD?
Sure, depending on the physical conditions of the measurement. It can
also be less than "300000 km/s" (by which I assume you really mean the
standard value for c). And this can happen even for an accelerated
observer in a region without any significant gravitation (e.g. in
Minkowski spacetime).
Tom Roberts

Then the respective equation (the variable speed of light as a
function of the gravitational potential) should be given, that is, the
problem should be resolved QUANTITATIVELY, and your brothers
hypnotists correctly refer to Einstein's 1911 equation c'=c(1+V/c^2)
where V is, of course, the gravitational potential. Amazingly you
disagree Roberts Roberts: you say the equation is WRONG. That's OK,
but the problem is that you never give the correct equation. Do you
think physics in this particular case is QUALITATIVE, or do you see
some other reason why Einstein's 1911 equation should be wrong and no
correct alternative should be given?

Pentcho Valev