🚀 go-pugleaf

Cosmological observations should not be used as evidence for or
against fundamental theories (Einstein's relativity) for the simple
reason that they are contaminated with lots of explicit or implicit
auxiliary hypotheses, hypotheses that do not belong to the fundamental
theory. In the case discussed below the observation that high-energy
photons arrive later than low-energy ones is accompanied by the
following hypothesis:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18068-universes-quantum-speed-bumps-no-obstacle-for-light.html
"If space-time is grainy, higher-energy photons would move more slowly
than their lower-energy counterparts. That's because higher-energy
photons have smaller wavelengths, which makes them more sensitive to
tiny fluctuations in space-time."

A much more reasonable hypothesis as to why high-energy photons travel
at a lower speed than low-energy ones could be advanced and yet, in my
view, Einstein's 1905 light postulate could be at most at stake but by
no means rejected if this particular observation were the only
evidence.

There are two experiments, those of Michelson-Morley and Pound-Rebka,
where all auxiliary hypotheses have become part of the fundamental
theory itself. This has created some "classical" internal ambiguity
but, on the other hand, arbitrary shifts in interpretation caused by
new ad hoc auxiliary hypotheses are precluded. So the fate of
Einstein's theory can unequivocally be decided by answering the
following questions:

The Michelson-Morley experiment is consistent with:

(A) Einstein's 1905 light postulate (c'=c)

(B) the antithesis of Einstein's 1905 light postulate, the equation
c'=c+v given by Newton's emission theory of light, where v is the
speed of the light source (relative to the observer)

(C) both Einstein's 1905 light postulate (c'=c) and its antithesis,
the equation c'=c+v given by Newton's emission theory of light, where
v is the speed of the light source (relative to the observer)

The Pound-Rebka experiment is consistent with:

(D) the assumption that the speed of light is constant in a
gravitational field

(E) the assumption that the speed of light varies with the
gravitational potential V in accordance with the equation c'=c(1+V/
c^2) given by Newton's emission theory of light and advanced by
Einstein in 1911

(F) the assumption that the speed of light varies with the
gravitational potential V in accordance with the equation c'=c(1+2V/
c^2) advanced by Einstein in 1915

Careful analysis would show that (B) and (E) form the only reasonable
couple.

Pentcho Valev wrote:

In Einsteiniana:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20327246.800-13-more-things-magic-results.html
"In 2005, researchers at the MAGIC gamma-ray telescope on La Palma in
the Canary Islands were studying gamma-ray bursts emitted by the black
hole in the centre of the Markarian 501 galaxy, half a billion light
years away. The burst's high-energy gamma rays arrived at the
telescope 4 minutes later than the lower-energy rays. Both parts of
the spectrum should have been emitted at the same time. So is the time
lag due to the high-energy radiation travelling slower through space?
That wouldn't make sense: it would contravene one of the central
tenets of special relativity. According to Einstein, all
electromagnetic radiation always travels through vacuum at the cosmic
speed limit the speed of light. The energy of the radiation should be
absolutely irrelevant."

http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2009/11/04/gamma-rays-einstein.html
"At stake was nothing less than a foundation of modern physics --
Einstein's theory of relativity, which posits that all electromagnetic
radiation travels at the same speed, whether low-energy radio waves,
high-energy X-rays or gamma rays, or any wavelength in between. (...)
After a journey of more than 7 billion light-years, however, the gamma
ray photons arrived nine-tenths of a second apart on May 9, 2009 --
not enough of a lag to account for the theorized quantum effects.
"Einstein, at this point, wins again," Michelson said."

http://live.psu.edu/story/42610
"Of the many gamma-ray photons detected by Fermi from the 2.1-second
burst, two had energies differing by a million times. Yet after
traveling some seven billion years, the pair of photons arrived just
nine-tenths of a second apart. "This measurement eliminates any
approach to a new theory of gravity that predicts a strong energy-
dependent change in the speed of light," Michelson said. The long-
distance experiment showed that "To one part in 100 million billion,
these two photons traveled at the same speed. "EINSTEIN STILL RULES,"
Michelson said."

In Big Brother's world:

http://www.online-literature.com/orwell/1984/
George Orwell: "In the end the Party would announce that two and two
made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that
they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their
position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the
very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their
philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was
terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise,
but that they might be right. For, after all, how do we know that two
and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the
past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist
only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable what then?"

Breathtaking news in Big Brother's world: In 2005, researchers at the
MAGIC gamma-ray telescope on La Palma in the Canary Islands added two
and two and did not get five, but then Stanford University's Peter
Michelson, the lead scientist on the Fermi Large Area Telescope, added
two and two again and did not get five either. "BIG BROTHER STILL
RULES,"Michelson said.

Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com