🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: sci.physics.relativity
Article #5598

Re: Seriously, What Can We Do About It?

#5598
From: Pentcho Valev
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 12:37
140 lines
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-mail
References: <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)