FREELY FALLING LOCAL INERTIAL FRAME IN THE RELATIVITY CULT

Pentcho Valev wrote:
The "freely falling local inertial frame" is a fundamental red herring
in Einstein's criminal cult. Any time relativity hypnotists have to
deal with evidence for variability of the speed of light they decla
"Yes Einstein did say the speed of light was variable and it IS
variable and we do know it is variable and we do know it can become
greater than c=300000km/s but: LOCALLY the speed of light is
constant". Since relativity hypnotists often omit "freely falling",
zombies do not know about "freely falling" and repeat LOCALLY as often
as necessary - see Dirk Van de moortel's insights involving LOCALLY
in

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...a1bcc557fedc33

I am afraid relativity hypnotists will have to abandon the red herring
called "freely falling local inertial frame" since ten years ago one
of them, Steve Carlip, described the frame of reference that is really
essential when the variability of the speed of light is dealt with:

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...914329d47c551d
"In this passage, Einstein is not talking about a freely falling
frame, but rather about a frame at rest relative to a source of
gravity. In such a frame, the speed of light can differ from c,
basically because of the effect of gravity (spacetime curvature) on
clocks and rulers."

Since Steve Carlip does make comments in sci.physics.relativity, he
may find it suitable to answer a question. Consider an extended
version of the above quotation of his:

Steve Carlip: "...if you measure the speed of light in an accelerating
reference frame, the answer will, in general, differ from c. In
special relativity, the speed of light is constant when measured in
any *inertial* frame. In general relativity, the appropriate
generalization is that the speed of light is constant in any freely
falling reference frame (in a region small enough that tidal effects
can be neglected). In this passage, Einstein is not talking about a
freely falling frame, but rather about a frame at rest relative to a
source of gravity. In such a frame, the speed of light can differ
from c, basically because of the effect of gravity (spacetime
curvature) on clocks and rulers."

So Carlip if we have "a frame at rest relative to a source of gravity"
but one that is very distant from the source of gravity, so distant
that the gravitational field there is zero and the frame is virtually
*inertial*, and if the source of gravity sends light towards this
frame, does your conclusion still hold: "In such a frame, the speed of
light can differ from c"??? Your brother hypnotist Tome Roberts once
said in this frame the speed of the light received from the source of
gravity would not differ from c but Roberts Roberts is the Albert
Einstein of our generation and therefore is constantly lying.

Pentcho Valev