🚀 go-pugleaf

> http://www.speed-light.info/speed_of_light_variable.htm
> "Einstein wrote this paper in 1911 in German (download from:  http://www.physik.uni-augsburg.de/annalen/history/einstein-papers/1911_35_898-908.pdf
> ). It predated the full formal development of general relativity by
> about four years. You can find an English translation of this paper in
> the Dover book 'The Principle of Relativity' beginning on page 99; 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+phi/c^2) where phi is the gravitational potential
> relative to the point where the speed of light co is measured......You
> can find a more sophisticated derivation later by Einstein (1955) from
> the full theory of general relativity in the weak field
> approximation....For the 1955 results but not in coordinates see page
> 93, eqn (6.28): c(r)=[1+2phi(r)/c^2]c. Namely the 1955 approximation
> shows a variation in km/sec twice as much as first predicted in
> 1911."
>
> Sooner or later Einsteiniana's teachers will have to answer the simple
> question: The gravitational redshift factor 1+phi/c^2 experimentally
> confirmed by Pound and Rebka is consistent with:
>
> (A) Einstein's 1911 equation c'=c(1+phi/c^2) GIVEN BY NEWTON'S
> EMISSION THEORY OF LIGHT?
>
> (B) Einstein's 1955 (in fact, it was devised in 1915) camouflage c'=c
> (1+2phi/c^2)?
>
> Then Einsteiniana's teachers will have to explain why they have been
> so silent about this simple problem for so long.

Einsteiniana's teachers will also have to explain why they have
established a schizophrenic atmosphere in which the falsehood of
Einstein's 1905 light postulate is constantly hinted at by teachers
themselves but any criticism coming from heretics is fiercely
persecuted:

http://www.fqxi.org/community/articles/display/116
"In addition, some quantum-spacetime models predict a particular
relationship between the speed of photons in gamma rays and their
energy. There have already been tantalizing hints of these effects. In
2007, for instance, the MAGIC gamma-ray telescope collaboration based
on La Palma in the Canary Islands announced that they had measured a 4-
minute time difference between the arrival of high and low-energy
gamma rays released at the same time in a flare from the Markarian 501
galaxy, some half a billion light years away (Physics Letters B, 668,
253-257, 2008). Standard theories suggest that the photons should have
arrived simultaneously. Along with Lee Smolin at the Perimeter
Institute in Waterloo, Ontario, Amelino-Camelia has begun analyzing
new gamma-ray data from NASA’s Fermi Telescope, launched in June 2008
(see image above right). The new data show similar delays in the
arrival times of photons, which they believe will help physicists
discriminate between these models."

http://www.fqxi.org/data/articles/Searching_for_the_Golden_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://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E03E7D8143FF932A05751C1A9649C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all
"As propounded by Einstein as an audaciously confident young patent
clerk in 1905, relativity declares that the laws of physics, and in
particular the speed of light -- 186,000 miles per second -- are the
same no matter where you are or how fast you are moving. Generations
of students and philosophers have struggled with the paradoxical
consequences of Einstein's deceptively simple notion, which underlies
all of modern physics and technology, wrestling with clocks that speed
up and slow down, yardsticks that contract and expand and bad jokes
using the word ''relative.''......''Perhaps relativity is too
restrictive for what we need in quantum gravity,'' Dr. Magueijo said.
''We need to drop a postulate, perhaps the constancy of the speed of
light.''

http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/2003/04/waseinsteinwrong/
Paul Davies: "Was Einstein wrong? Einstein's famous equation E=mc2 is
the only scientific formula known to just about everyone. The "c" here
stands for the speed of light. It is one of the most fundamental of
the basic constants of physics. Or is it? In recent years a few
maverick scientists have claimed that the speed of light might not be
constant at all. Shock, horror! Does this mean the next Great
Revolution in Science is just around the corner?"

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/519406/posts
"A GROUP of astronomers and cosmologists has warned that the laws
thought to govern the universe, including Albert Einstein's theory of
relativity, must be rewritten. The group, which includes Professor
Stephen Hawking and Sir Martin Rees, the astronomer royal, say such
laws may only work for our universe but not in others that are now
also thought to exist. "It is becoming increasingly likely that the
rules we had thought were fundamental through time and space are
actually just bylaws for our bit of it," said Rees, whose new book,
Our Cosmic Habitat, is published next month. "Creation is emerging as
even stranger than we thought." Among the ideas facing revision is
Einstein's belief that the speed of light must always be the same -
186,000 miles a second in a vacuum. There is growing evidence that
light moved much faster during the early stages of our universe. Rees,
Hawking and others are so concerned at the impact of such ideas that
they recently organised a private conference in Cambridge for more
than 30 leading cosmologists."

Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com