🚀 go-pugleaf

On 6 fév, 10:52, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Feb 6, 5:33 pm, srp2...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 6 fév, 02:34, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > >http://philipball.blogspot.com/2007/09/arthur-eddington-was-innocent-...
> > > "With the technology then available, measuring the bending of
> > > starlight was very challenging. And contrary to popular belief,
> > > Newtonian physics did not predict that light would remain undeflected
> > > - Einstein himself pointed out in 1911 that Newtonian gravity should
> > > cause some deviation too. So the matter was not that of an all-or-
> > > nothing shift in stars' positions, but hinged on the exact numbers."
>
> > Right.
>
> > Classical Newtonian mechanics predicts that light will bend with
> > twice the angle observed.
>
> > Relativistic Newtonian mechanics however predicts the correct
> > angle since it is now understood that only half a photon's energy
> > is sensitive to transverse interaction.
>
> If you wish your analysis to be complete, you should discuss
> Einstein's 1911 equation c'=c(1+V/c^2) showing how the speed of light
> varies with the gravitational potential V. Note that c'=c(1+V/c^2) is
> consistent with the gravitational redshift factor 1+V/c^2 confirmed
> experimentally:
>
> 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....

This simply is impossible. From electromagnetic theory and
confirming observation, when em radiation moves deeper into
a gravity field, its energy increases but its velocity doesn't
change, and the opposite when radiation moves away from a
gravity field, its energy diminishes but its velocity remains
constant.

Doppler radars would not work even here on earth if this
was not the case, and they do work perfectly, based on
the underlying principle that the speed of light is
constant.

> 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."
>
> Note also that, by applying Einstein's equivalence principle, you can
> prove that c'=c(1+V/c^2) is equivalent to c'=c+v, an equation given by
> Newton's emission theory and showing how the speed of light varies
> with v, the relative speed of the light source and the observer, in
> the absence of a gravitational field.

My analysis is complete. The verified invariance of the speed of
light has nothing to do with GR or even SR. It is an electromagnetic
property of em radiation.

Whatever Einstein or anyone else could have said to the contrary
reveals only partial understanding of electromagnetism at the time
of statement.

André Michaud