ESSENCE OF GENERAL RELATIVITY: AMBIGUOUS SPEED OF LIGHT

The following quotations suggest that general relativity is, in
Einstein's words, "a theory of light that can be considered a fusion
of the oscillation and emission theories", that is, an inconsistency
where Einstein's 1905 false light postulate (c'=c) and its true
alternative, the equation c'=c+v given by Newton's emission theory of
light, coexist (there is some additional camouflage of course):

http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers...UP_TimesNR.pdf
"What Can We Learn about the Ontology of Space and Time from the
Theory of Relativity?", John D. Norton: "In general relativity there
is no comparable sense of the constancy of the speed of light. The
constancy of the speed of light is a consequence of the perfect
homogeneity of spacetime presumed in special relativity. There is a
special velocity at each event; homogeneity forces it to be the same
velocity everywhere. We lose that homogeneity in the transition to
general relativity and with it we lose the constancy of the speed of
light. Such was Einstein's conclusion at the earliest moments of his
preparation for general relativity. ALREADY IN 1907, A MERE TWO YEARS
AFTER THE COMPLETION OF THE SPECIAL THEORY, HE HAD CONCLUDED THAT THE
SPEED OF LIGHT IS VARIABLE IN THE PRESENCE OF A GRAVITATIONAL FIELD."

http://www.astrofind.net/documents/t...-radiation.php
The Development of Our Views on the Composition and Essence of
Radiation by Albert Einstein
Albert Einstein 1909: "A large body of facts shows undeniably that
light has certain fundamental properties that are better explained by
Newton's emission theory of light than by the oscillation theory. For
this reason, I believe that the next phase in the development of
theoretical physics will bring us a theory of light that can be
considered a fusion of the oscillation and emission theories. The
purpose of the following remarks is to justify this belief and to show
that a profound change in our views on the composition and essence of
light is imperative.....Then the electromagnetic fields that make up
light no longer appear as a state of a hypothetical medium, but rather
as independent entities that the light source gives off, just as in
Newton's emission theory of light......Relativity theory has changed
our views on light. Light is conceived not as a manifestation of the
state of some hypothetical medium, but rather as an independent entity
like matter. Moreover, this theory shares with the corpuscular theory
of light the unusual property that light carries inertial mass from
the emitting to the absorbing object."

http://www.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/ae13.cfm
"So, it is absolutely true that the speed of light is not constant in
a gravitational field [which, by the equivalence principle, applies as
well to accelerating (non-inertial) frames of reference]. If this were
not so, there would be no bending of light by the gravitational field
of stars....Indeed, this is exactly how Einstein did the calculation
in: 'On the Influence of Gravitation on the Propagation of Light,'
Annalen der Physik, 35, 1911. which predated the full formal
development of general relativity by about four years. This paper is
widely available in English. You can find a copy beginning on page 99
of the Dover book 'The Principle of Relativity.' You will find in
section 3 of that paper, Einstein's derivation of the (variable) speed
of light in a gravitational potential, eqn (3). The result is,
c' = c0 ( 1 + V / c^2 )
where V is the gravitational potential relative to the point where the
speed of light c0 is measured."

http://www.blazelabs.com/f-g-gcont.asp
"So, faced with this evidence most readers must be wondering why we
learn about the importance of the constancy of speed of light. Did
Einstein miss this? Sometimes I find out that what's written in our
textbooks is just a biased version taken from the original work, so
after searching within the original text of the theory of GR by
Einstein, I found this quote: "In the second place our result shows
that, 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
and to which we have already frequently referred, 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. Now we
might think that as a consequence of this, the special theory of
relativity and with it the whole theory of relativity would be laid in
the dust. But in reality this is not the case. We can only conclude
that the special theory of relativity cannot claim an unlimited domain
of validity ; its results hold only so long as we are able to
disregard the influences of gravitational fields on the phenomena
(e.g. of light)." - Albert Einstein (1879-1955) - The General Theory
of Relativity: Chapter 22 - A Few Inferences from the General
Principle of Relativity-. Today we find that since the Special Theory
of Relativity unfortunately became part of the so called mainstream
science, it is considered a sacrilege to even suggest that the speed
of light be anything other than a constant. This is somewhat
surprising since even Einstein himself suggested in a paper "On the
Influence of Gravitation on the Propagation of Light," Annalen der
Physik, 35, 1911, that the speed of light might vary with the
gravitational potential. Indeed, the variation of the speed of light
in a vacuum or space is explicitly shown in Einstein's calculation for
the angle at which light should bend upon the influence of gravity.
One can find his calculation in his paper. The result is c'=c(1+V/c^2)
where V is the gravitational potential relative to the point where the
measurement is taken. 1+V/c^2 is also known as the GRAVITATIONAL
REDSHIFT factor."

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."

http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s6-01/6-01.htm
"In geometrical units we define c_0 = 1, so Einstein's 1911 formula
can be written simply as c=1+phi. However, this formula for the
speed of light (not to mention this whole approach to gravity) turned
out to be incorrect, as Einstein realized during the years leading up
to 1915 and the completion of the general theory. In fact, the
general theory of relativity doesn't give any equation for the speed
of light at a particular location, because the effect of gravity
cannot be represented by a simple scalar field of c values. Instead,
the "speed of light" at a each point depends on the direction of the
light ray through that point, as well as on the choice of coordinate
systems, so we can't generally talk about the value of c at a given
point in a non-vanishing gravitational field. However, if we consider
just radial light rays near a spherically symmetrical (and non-
rotating) mass, and if we agree to use a specific set of coordinates,
namely those in which the metric coefficients are independent of t,
then we can read a formula analogous to Einstein's 1911 formula
directly from the Schwarzschild metric. (...) In the Newtonian limit
the classical gravitational potential at a distance r from mass m is
phi=-m/r, so if we let c_r = dr/dt denote the radial speed of light
in Schwarzschild coordinates, we have c_r =1+2phi, which corresponds
to Einstein's 1911 equation, except that we have a factor of 2 instead
of 1 on the potential term."

Pentcho Valev

Pentcho Valev wrote:

The following quotations suggest that general relativity is, in
Einstein's words, "a theory of light that can be considered a fusion
of the oscillation and emission theories", that is, an inconsistency
where Einstein's 1905 false light postulate
[snip crap]

http://cc3d.free.fr/Relativity/Relat1.html
Special Relativity for yard apes

http://www.edu-observatory.org/physics-faq/Relativity/SR/experiments.html
Experimental constraints on Special Relativity

http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2006-3/
http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0311039
Experimental constraints on General Relativity

idiot

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2

Uncle Al wrote:
Pentcho Valev wrote:
The following quotations suggest that general relativity is, in
Einstein's words, "a theory of light that can be considered a fusion
of the oscillation and emission theories", that is, an inconsistency
where Einstein's 1905 false light postulate
[snip crap]

http://cc3d.free.fr/Relativity/Relat1.html
Special Relativity for yard apes

http://www.edu-observatory.org/physics-faq/Relativity/SR/experiments.html
Experimental constraints on Special Relativity

Quote
3.2 One-Way Tests of Light-Speed Isotropy

Note that while these experiments clearly use a one-way light path and
find isotropy, they are inherently _*UNABLE*_ to rule out a large class
of theories in which the one-way speed of light is anisotropic.
UNQuote

Moron.

Uwe Hayek.


http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2006-3/
http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0311039
Experimental constraints on General Relativity

idiot

On Oct 7, 7:59*pm, Hayek wrote:
Uncle Al wrote:
Pentcho Valev wrote:
The following quotations suggest that general relativity is, in
Einstein's words, "a theory of light that can be considered a fusion
of the oscillation and emission theories", that is, an inconsistency
where Einstein's 1905 false light postulate
[snip crap]

http://cc3d.free.fr/Relativity/Relat1.html
*Special Relativity for yard apes

http://www.edu-observatory.org/physi...periments.html
*Experimental constraints on Special Relativity

Quote
3.2 One-Way Tests of Light-Speed Isotropy

Note that while these experiments clearly use a one-way light path and
find isotropy, they are inherently _*UNABLE*_ to rule out a large class
of theories in which the one-way speed of light is anisotropic.

Many Einsteinians, in particular those developing versions of quantum
gravity, abandoned Einstein's 1905 false light postulate long time ago
and hint at this in various ways (while Einstein zombie world is
invariably singing "Divine Einstein" and "Yes we all believe in
relativity, relativity, relativity"). They call special relativity
"wrong", "the root of evil", suggest that "Einstein may have started
the rot", that "the speed of light depends on its frequency", look for
"Lorentz violations" etc:

Joao Magueijo, PLUS VITE QUE LA LUMIERE, Dunod, 2003, pp. 298-299:
"La racine du mal etait clairement la relativite restreinte. Tous ces
paradoxes resultaient d'effets bien connus comme la contraction des
longueurs, la dilatation du temps, ou E=mc^2, tous des predictions
directes de la relativite restreinte. (...) La consequence en etait
inevitable: pour edifier une theorie coherente de la gravite
quantique, quelle qu'elle soit, nous [Joao Magueijo et Lee Smolin]
devions commencer par abandonner la relativite restreinte. (...) Mais,
comme nous l'avons vu, celle-ci repose sur deux principes
independants. Le premier est la relativite du mouvement, le second la
constance de la vitesse de la lumiere. Une des solutions possibles a
notre probleme pouvait etre d'abandonner la relativite du mouvement.
(...) C'est une possibilite bien sur, mais nous avons choisi
l'alternative evidente: preserver la relativite du mouvement, mais
admettre qu'a de tres hautes energies, la vitesse de la lumiere ne
soit plus constante."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main...11/bosmo10.xml
"Smolin admits that "we have made no real headway". "We have failed,"
he says. "It has produced a crisis in physics."..... EINSTEIN MAY HAVE
STARTED THE ROT."

http://www.logosjournal.com/issue_4.3/smolin.htm
Lee Smolin: "Quantum theory was not the only theory that bothered
Einstein. Few people have appreciated how dissatisfied he was with his
own theories of relativity. Special relativity grew out of Einstein's
insight that the laws of electromagnetism cannot depend on relative
motion and that the speed of light therefore must be always the same,
no matter how the source or the observer moves. Among the consequences
of that theory are that energy and mass are equivalent (the now-
legendary relationship E = mc2) and that time and distance are
relative, not absolute. SPECIAL RELATIVITY WAS THE RESULT OF 10 YEARS
OF INTELLECTUAL STRUGGLE, YET EINSTEIN HAD CONVINCED HIMSELF IT WAS
WRONG WITHIN TWO YEARS OF PUBLISHING IT."

http://www.fqxi.org/data/articles/Se...lden_Spike.pdf
"Loop quantum gravity also makes the heretical prediction that the
speed of light depends on its frequency. That prediction violates
special relativity, Einstein's rule that light in a vacuum travels at
a constant speed for all observers..."

http://edge.org/3rd_culture/smolin03...n03_index.html
Lee Smolin: "Now, here is the really interesting part: Some of the
effects predicted by the theory appear to be in conflict with one of
the principles of Einstein's special theory of relativity, the theory
that says that the speed of light is a universal constant. It's the
same for all photons, and it is independent of the motion of the
sender or observer. How is this possible, if that theory is itself
based on the principles of relativity? The principle of the constancy
of the speed of light is part of special relativity, but we quantized
Einstein's general theory of relativity. Because Einstein's special
theory is only a kind of approximation to his general theory, we can
implement the principles of the latter but find modifications to the
former. And this is what seems to be happening! So Gambini, Pullin,
and others calculated how light travels in a quantum geometry and
found that the theory predicts that the speed of light has a small
dependence on energy. Photons of higher energy travel slightly slower
than low-energy photons....A very exciting question we are now
wrestling with is, How drastically shall we be forced to modify
Einstein's special theory of relativity if the predicted effect is
observed? The most severe possibility is that the principle of
relativity simply fails....But there is another possibility. This is
that the principle of relativity is preserved, but Einstein's special
theory of relativity requires modification so as to allow photons to
have a speed that depends on energy. The most shocking thing I have
learned in the last year is that this is a real possibility. A photon
can have an energy-dependent speed without violating the principle of
relativity!"

http://umdgrb.umd.edu/cosmic/physics%20overview.htm
"Some quantum gravity theories predict a breakdown of Lorentz
invariance observable as an energy dependent speed of light, c -- c'
= c + E/ alpha ."

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/...705.4507v1.pdf
Joao Magueijo and John W. Moffat: "The question is then: If Lorentz
invariance is broken, what happens to the speed of light? Given that
Lorentz invariance follows from two postulates -- (1) relativity of
observers in inertial frames of reference and (2) constancy of the
speed of light--it is clear that either or both of those principles
must be violated."

Pentcho Valev