🚀 go-pugleaf

On Nov 17, 8:36 am, nottooo...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Nov 16, 4:46 am, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > worth the effort don't you think?
>
> > No because Divine Albert has already solved half of the problem (in
> > fact the whole problem) in 1911:
>
> So general relativity correctly describes the speed of light? Then
> what are you moaning about? You should be using your energy to promote
> public understanding of GR.

Let us say it this way: Einstein 1911 equation c'=c(1+V/c^2)
describing how the speed of light varies with the gravitational
potential is CORRECT:

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."

However the fact that Einstein's 1911 equation c'=c(1+V/c^2) is
CORRECT implies that, as your masters measure the gravitational
redshift and e.g. confirm Pound and Rebka's result f'=f(1+V/c^2), they
in fact measure the variability of the speed of light and confirm
Einstein's 1911 equation c'=c(1+V/c^2). They do not confirm any
gravitational time dilation. Equivalently, the Doppler effect confirms
the prediction of Newton's emission theory of light c'=c+v, where v is
the relative speed of the light source and the observer. Again no time
dilation. Now see what your masters and their sycophants teach:

http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2007/1113/2
"Special relativity joins space and time into a single weird thing
called spacetime that appears different to observers moving relative
to each other. Imagine you hold a firecracker in each of your
outstretched hands and you see the two go off simultaneously. (Ouch!)
Bizarrely, another person zooming by at near-light speed will see the
firecrackers explode at different times. (She'll also claim your arms
are shorter than you say they are.) In much the same way, a clock
flying at near-light speed would tick more slowly than the watch on
your wrist, and a person who travels through space in a high-speed
rocket would appear to age unusually slowly to someone stuck on Earth.
Such "time dilation" seems preposterous. But in 1907, Einstein
proposed an experiment to test the idea. Atoms and ions give off light
of specific colors. Light is a kind of rippling wave, and the rate of
rippling can be viewed essentially as the ticking of a clock. Einstein
reasoned that if the ion were accelerated to near-light speed, time
would slow for it and, hence, so would the rippling of the emitted
light waves. That is, the speeding ions would emit light of a lower
frequency. Now, Gerald Gwinner, a physicist at the University of
Manitoba in Winnipeg, Canada, and colleagues have tested time dilation
in just this way."

Pentcho Valev