Article View: sci.physics.relativity
Article #5598Re: Seriously, What Can We Do About It?
From: Pentcho Valev
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 12:37
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 12:37
140 lines
9644 bytes
9644 bytes
On Feb 13, 11:39 am, Tom Roberts <tjroberts...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in sci.physics.relativity: > Josef Matz wrote: > > GR is wrong. > > Strong words from someone who clearly does not understand the issues. > > If GR is "wrong", you should be able to either display an internal > inconsistency in its formulation, or provide a definitive experiment > which disagrees with its predictions. to date, NOBODY has done either of > those (the first is known to be not possible). Roberts Roberts in general relativity the speed of light is both constant and variable, and it is Divine Albert that has clearly demonstrated this "internal inconsistency" while trying to camouflage it: http://www.bartleby.com/173/22.html Albert Einstein: "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 result hold only so long as we are able to disregard the influences of gravitational fields on the phenomena (e.g. of light). Since it has often been contended by opponents of the theory of relativity that the special theory of relativity is overthrown by the general theory of relativity, it is perhaps advisable to make the facts of the case clearer by means of an appropriate comparison...." The comparison is, of course, irrelevant but Divine Albert was a pagiarist and Poincare had not said anything about simultaneous constancy and variability of the speed of light (only Divine Albert was able to discover an idiocy of this kind). So Roberts Roberts some of your criminal brothers fiercely teach that, in a gravitational field, the speed of light is CONSTANT: http://www.astronomynotes.com/relativity/s4.htm "Prediction: light escaping from a large mass should lose energy---the wavelength must increase since the speed of light is constant. Stronger surface gravity produces a greater increase in the wavelength. This is a consequence of time dilation. Suppose person A on the massive object decides to send light of a specific frequency f to person B all of the time. So every second, f wave crests leave person A. The same wave crests are received by person B in an interval of time interval of (1+z) seconds. He receives the waves at a frequency of f/(1+z). Remember that the speed of light c = (the frequency f) (the wavelength L). If the frequency is reduced by (1+z) times, the wavelength must INcrease by (1+z) times: L_atB = (1+z) L_atA. In the doppler effect, this lengthening of the wavelength is called a redshift. For gravity, the effect is called a GRAVITATIONAL REDSHIFT." http://helios.gsfc.nasa.gov/qa_sp_gr.html "Is light affected by gravity? If so, how can the speed of light be constant? Wouldn't the light coming off of the Sun be slower than the light we make here? If not, why doesn't light escape a black hole? Yes, light is affected by gravity, but not in its speed. General Relativity (our best guess as to how the Universe works) gives two effects of gravity on light. It can bend light (which includes effects such as gravitational lensing), and it can change the energy of light. But it changes the energy by shifting the frequency of the light (gravitational redshift) not by changing light speed. Gravity bends light by warping space so that what the light beam sees as "straight" is not straight to an outside observer. The speed of light is still constant." Dr. Eric Christian Other criminals (you are among them Roberts Roberts) have read Divine Albert's writings more carefully and accordingly teach that, in a gravitational field, the speed of light is VARIABLE: http://www.math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SpeedOfLight/speed_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." 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 "The first confirmation of a long range variation in the speed of light travelling in space came in 1964. Irwin Shapiro, it seems, was the first to make use of a previously forgotten facet of general relativity theory -- that the speed of light is reduced when it passes through a gravitational field....Faced with this evidence, Einstein stated:"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."......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." Pentcho Valev pvalev@yahoo.com
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<61c4761b-69fa-4fef-ba8c-20939efcd27b@n20g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!n20g2000hsh.googlegroups.com!not-for-mailReferences:
<4970r3puemi7k6rn5lb3h0m6cc8fj1tt6k@4ax.com> <47b1a721$0$4281$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net> <EXysj.595$fX7.582@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Thread: 10f545,3afa0e7fc1e18377 X-Google-Thread: 10b271,5a916507979f298b X-Google-Thread: fa4c1,5a916507979f298b X-Google-Thread: f55d3,5a916507979f298b X-Google-Thread: 1139f8,5a916507979f298b X-Google-Attributes: gid10f545,gid10b271,gidfa4c1,gidf55d3,gid1139f8,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!n20g2000hsh.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity, sci.physics, fr.sci.physique, fr.sci.philo, fr.sci.maths Subject: Re: Seriously, What Can We Do About It? Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 04:37:24 -0800 (PST) Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 140 Message-ID: <61c4761b-69fa-4fef-ba8c-20939efcd27b@n20g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> References: <4970r3puemi7k6rn5lb3h0m6cc8fj1tt6k@4ax.com> <47b1a721$0$4281$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net> <EXysj.595$fX7.582@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 85.91.141.160 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1202906244 29823 127.0.0.1 (13 Feb 2008 12:37:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 12:37:24 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: n20g2000hsh.googlegroups.com; posting-host=85.91.141.160; posting-account=Lz-LbgoAAABPDavKeW-eYeobwLHD_cvQ User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.30),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)