🚀 go-pugleaf

"Pentcho Valev" <pvalev@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:6f53ec38-c9be-4aca-aa7a-0b6c753cf666@k39g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> Is the Pound-Rebka experiment compatible with Einstein's 1905 light
> postulate? The speed of photons moving towards the source of gravity
> varies with the gravitational potential (phi) in accordance with the
> equation c'=c(1+(phi)/c^2) given by Newton's emission theory of light.
> Einstein's equivalence principle converts this scenario into another
> scenario where the photons experience no gravitational field but move
> from the front end (emitter) to the back end (both receiver and
> observer) of an accelerating rocket. It is easy to see that
>
> (phi) = cv
>
> where v is the speed of the emitter (at the moment of emission)
> relative to the observer (at the moment of reception). So the equation
> c'=c(1+(phi)/c^2) becomes c'=c+v, the Newtonian antithesis of
> Einstein's 1905 light postulate. By confirming the equation c'=c(1+
> (phi)/c^2), the Pound-Rebka experiment confirms the equation c'=c+v
> given by Newton's emission theory of light and REFUTES Einstein's 1905
> light postulate.
>
> Pentcho Valev wrote:
>
> The speed of light emitted downwards with initial speed c (relative to
> the emitter) varies with the gravitational potential (phi) in
> accordance with one of the following equations:
>
> (1) c' = c(1+(phi)/c^2): Einstein's 1911 equation given by Newton's
> emission theory of light.
>
> (2) c' = c(1+2(phi)/c^2): Einstein's 1915 equation - the final version
> in Einstein's general relativity.
>
> (3) c' = c: Hawking's equation - the speed of light does NOT vary with
> the gravitational potential.
>
> The frequency of light emitted downwards with initial frequency f
> varies with the gravitational potential (phi) in accordance with the
> equation:
>
> f' = f(1+(phi)/c^2)
>
> This equation is compatible with (1) and incompatible with (2) and
> (3). It was confirmed experimentally by Pound and Rebka in 1960.
>
> Generally Einsteiniana presents the Pound-Rebka experiment as a
> glorious confirmation of Divine Albert's Divine Theory but sometimes
> Einsteinians make fun of believers by teaching confusing ideas:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/44abc7dbb30db6c2
>
> John Norton: "THE MICHELSON-MORLEY EXPERIMENT IS FULLY COMPATIBLE WITH
> AN EMISSION THEORY OF LIGHT THAT CONTRADICTS THE LIGHT POSTULATE."
>
> Tom Roberts (an Einsteinian famous on sci.physics.relativity): "Sure.
> The fact that this one experiment is compatible with other theories
> does not refute relativity in any way. The full experimental record
> refutes most if not all emission theories, but not relativity."
>
> Pentcho Valev: "THE POUND-REBKA EXPERIMENT IS FULLY COMPATIBLE WITH AN
> EMISSION THEORY OF LIGHT THAT CONTRADICTS THE LIGHT POSTULATE."
>
> Tom Roberts: "Sure. But this experiment, too, does not refute
> relativity. The full experimental record refutes most if not all
> emission theories, but not relativity."
>
> Pentcho Valev

=========================

           \/
         >c<
           /\
            |
            |
  \/       \/        \/
>c<-->c<-->c<
  /\       /\        /\
            |
            |
           \/
         >c<
           /\

GLB

========================