RELATIVIST PAUL ANDERSEN ABOUT THE SPEED OF LIGHT

On May 10, 10:34 am, Pentcho Valev wrote:

[...]

Have you thought suffuciently over your conclusions?

Have you?


Pentcho Valev

Eric Gisse wrote:
On May 10, 10:34 am, Pentcho Valev wrote:

[...]

Have you thought suffuciently over your conclusions?

Have you?

Have I thought sufficiently over Moortel's conclusions? No because I
was considering the consistency/inconsistency between the
gravitational redshift factor 1+V/c^2 and Einstein's 1911 equation
c'=c(1+V/c^2) describing the variation of the speed of light. My
conclusion (I have thought sufficiently over it) is that they are
CONSISTENT:

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...11d7063c997fcc
Pentcho Valev wrote:
My overly simplistic formula??? I have just used

frequency = (speed of light)/(wavelength)

according to which the gravitational redshift factor 1+V/c^2 is
consistent with Einstein's 1911 equation c'=c(1+V/c^2) describing the
variation of the speed of light. Do you agree they are consistent
Roberts Roberts?

Now Master Tom Roberts, the Albert Einstein of our generation (Hawking
is no longer etc.) is thinking over my conclusion. He knows the
gravitational redshift factor is consistent with Einstein's 1911
equation (clever relativists have always known that) but, on the other
hand, Master Tom Roberts declared Einstein's 1911 equation c'=c(1+V/
c^2) wrong (because declaring Einstein's 1911 equation right would be
tantamout to declaring the end of Einstein's criminal cult). You
should ask him about Einstein's 1911 equation from time to time, e.g.
in the following way:

Master Master, is Valev's conclusion correct? Are the gravitational
redshift factor 1+V/c^2 and Einstein's 1911 equation c'=c(1+V/c^2)
describing the variation of the speed of light consistent, oh Divine
Master? And if they are consistent, how could Einstein's 1911 equation
be wrong, oh Divine Master Tom Roberts, oh Albert Einstein of our
generation (Hawking has NEVER been the Albert Einstein of our
generation)?

Pentcho Valev

On May 10, 11:18 pm, Pentcho Valev wrote:
[...1911...]

Nobody but you cares about Einstein's previous attempts. Give it a
rest.

Eric Gisse wrote:
On May 10, 11:18 pm, Pentcho Valev wrote:
[...1911...]

Nobody but you cares about Einstein's previous attempts. Give it a
rest.

Master Tom Roberts cares as well. He says Einstein's 1911 equation
c'=c(1+V/c^2) is wrong although he knows the equation is right. If he
did not care he would say: "Einstein's 1911 equation c'=c(1+V/c^2) is
right but who cares."

Pentcho Valev

Eric Gisse wrote:
On May 10, 11:18 pm, Pentcho Valev wrote:
[...1911...]

Nobody but you cares about Einstein's previous attempts. Give it a
rest.

Master Tom Roberts cares as well. He says Einstein's 1911 equation
c'=c(1+V/c^2) is wrong although he knows the equation is right. If he
did not care he would say: "Einstein's 1911 equation c'=c(1+V/c^2) is
right but who cares."

Pentcho Valev