🚀 go-pugleaf

On Jan 14, 2:55 pm, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 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."
>
> In such cases Einstein'sequivalenceprinciple acts like the face of
> Medusa the Gorgon: on seeing it,Einsteiniansget petrified and remain
> so until the danger is over. And the danger is enormous indeed: by
> applying  theequivalenceprinciple,Einsteinianswould prove that
> Einstein's 1911 equation c'=c(1+V/c^2), valid in the presence of a
> gravitational field, is EQUIVALENT to the equation c'=c+v given by
> Newton's emission theory of light and valid in the absence of a
> gravitational field. ThenEinsteinianswould have to inform Einstein
> zombie world that the gravitational redshift factor 1+V/c^2 confirms
> c'=c+v and refutes c'=c, that is, refutes Einstein's 1905 light
> postulate.
>
> In other casesEinsteinianslove Einstein'sequivalenceprinciple and
> use it as a red herring, in the following way:
>
> http://daily.stanford.edu/article/2008/1/14/labVerifiesEinsteinTheory
> Lab verifies Einstein theory. In a 25-foot pit in the basement of
> Varian Physics Building, Stanford researchers are running an
> experiment that could unravel Einstein's most famous theory. Physics
> Prof. Mark Kasevich and his lab are testing theequivalenceprinciple,
> a central tenet of general relativity....."It has been verified to the
> 13th decimal place," said Hogan. "Our goal is to push the limits to 15
> decimals."

The variability of the speed of light in a gravitational field is
extremely rarely discussed in Einstein criminal cult; in the
francophone subdivision of the cult for instance it has NEVER been
discussed (French Einsteinians just know the speed of light is
constant and that's it). So when an Einsteinian (Tom Roberts in this
case) has found courage to analyse the problem and even reach
important conclusions, his writings should be considered again and
again:

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/browse_frm/thread/4ac792905c8c439c?

Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com