🚀 go-pugleaf

On Apr 9, 9:03 am, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I suspect clever cosmologists now clearly see the importance of the
> following question:
>
> Given the formula:
>
> frequency = (speed of light)/(wavelength)
>
> is the redshift of a distant star's light due to a change in the speed
> of light, or is it due to a change in wavelength?
>
> The answer "redshift is due to change in the speed of light"
> automatically converts what Einstein in 1954 characterized as
> "entirely possible" into a fact:
>
> http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/index.php?option=com_content&task=vi...
> John Stachel: "Einstein discussed the other side of the particle-field
> dualism - get rid of fields and just have particles."
> Albert Einstein 1954: "I consider it entirely possible that physics
> cannot be based upon the field concept, that is on continuous
> structures. Then nothing will remain of my whole castle in the air,
> including the theory of gravitation, but also nothing of the rest of
> contemporary physics."
> John Stachel's comment: "If I go down, everything goes down, ha ha,
> hm, ha ha ha."
>
> Silly old interpretations of "redshift is due to a change in
> wavelength" can only make clever cosmologists sick at heart:
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Brief-History-Time-Stephen-Hawking/dp/0553380168
> Stephen Hawking, "A Brief History of Time", Chapter 3:
> "In the 1920s, when astronomers began to look at the spectra of stars
> in other galaxies, they found something most peculiar: there were the
> same characteristic sets of missing colors as for stars in our own
> galaxy, but they were all shifted by the same relative amount toward
> the red end of the spectrum. To understand the implications of this,
> we must first understand the Doppler effect. As we have seen, visible
> light consists of fluctuations, or waves, in the electromagnetic
> field. The wavelength (or distance from one wave crest to the next) of
> light is extremely small, ranging from four to seven ten-millionths of
> a meter. The different wavelengths of light are what the human eye
> sees as different colors, with the longest wavelengths appearing at
> the red end of the spectrum and the shortest wavelengths at the blue
> end. Now imagine a source of light at a constant distance from us,
> such as a star, emitting waves of light at a constant wavelength.
> Obviously the wavelength of the waves we receive will be the same as
> the wavelength at which they are emitted (the gravitational field of
> the galaxy will not be large enough to have a significant effect).
> Suppose now that the source starts moving toward us. When the source
> emits the next wave crest it will be nearer to us, so the distance
> between wave crests will be smaller than when the star was stationary.
> This means that the wavelength of the waves we receive is shorter than
> when the star was stationary. Correspondingly, if the source is moving
> away from us, the wavelength of the waves we receive will be longer.
> In the case of light, therefore, means that stars moving away from us
> will have their spectra shifted toward the red end of the spectrum
> (red-shifted) and those moving toward us will have their spectra blue-
> shifted."
>
> The correct answer "redshift is due to change in the speed of light"
> will have to be officially adopted soon:
>
> http://www.blazelabs.com/f-g-gcont.asp
> "So, faced with this evidence most readers must be wondering why we
> learn about the importance of the constancy of speed of light. Did
> Einstein miss this? Sometimes I find out that what's written in our
> textbooks is just a biased version taken from the original work, so
> after searching within the original text of the theory of GR by
> Einstein, I found this quote: "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 results hold only so long as we are able to
> disregard the influences of gravitational fields on the phenomena
> (e.g. of light)." - Albert Einstein (1879-1955) - The General Theory
> of Relativity: Chapter 22 - A Few Inferences from the General
> Principle of Relativity-. 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."
>
> http://www.sciscoop.com/story/2008/10/30/41323/484
> "Does the apparently constant speed of light change over the vast
> stretches of the universe? Would our understanding of black holes,
> ancient supernovae, dark matter, dark energy, the origins of the
> universe and its ultimate fate be different if the speed of light were
> not constant?.....Couldn't it be that the supposed vacuum of space is
> acting as an interstellar medium to lower the speed of light like some
> cosmic swimming pool? If so, wouldn't a stick plunged into the pool
> appear bent as the light is refracted and won't that affect all our
> observations about the universe. I asked theoretical physicist Leonard
> Susskind, author of The Black Hole War, recently reviewed in Science
> Books to explain this apparent anomaly....."You are entirely right,"
> he told me, "there are all sorts of effects on the propagation of
> light that astronomers and astrophysicists must account for. The point
> of course is that they (not me) do take these effects into account and
> correct for them." "In a way this work is very heroic but unheralded,"
> adds Susskind, "An immense amount of extremely brilliant analysis has
> gone into the detailed corrections that are needed to eliminate these
> 'spurious' effects so that people like me can just say 'light travels
> with the speed of light.' So, there you have it. My concern about
> cosmic swimming pools and bent sticks does indeed apply, but
> physicists have taken the deviations into account so that other
> physicists, such as Susskind, who once proved Stephen Hawking wrong,
> can battle their way to a better understanding of the universe."

Usually Einsteinians avoid any discussion of the implications of the
formula:

frequency = (speed of light)/(wavelength)

but still from time to time they extract career and money from an
idiotic interpretation of the fact that the frequency and the speed of
light change while the wavelength remains constant:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/02/010212075309.htm
"Einstein In Need Of Update? Calculations Show The Speed Of Light
Might Change.....Dimitri Nanopoulos, who holds the rank of
Distinguished Professor of Physics at Texas A&M University and heads
the Houston Advanced Research Center's Group for Astroparticle
Physics, established, along with other physicists, that the speed of
light, instead of being the constant value of 186,282 miles per
second, might change. In 1905, Einstein established that light was the
only object to have a constant speed in all reference frames. This
idea was the cornerstone to his theory of relativity, and later to
laws of physics. "If the speed of light proves not to be constant any
more, even by a very small changeable amount, laws of physics - the
theory of relativity included - will have to undergo significant
changes," says Nanopoulos. Nanopoulos, who chairs the Theoretical
Physics Division of the Academy of Athens, is among the many
physicists who are trying to establish the basis of quantum gravity, a
theory that has been dreamed of by physicists since the
1920s...."Through our calculations, we found that the speed of light
is frequency-dependent," says Nanopoulos. "But a change in the usual
speed of light value of 186,282 miles per second is noticeable only
for light coming from astronomical objects situated very far from
Earth, which is why this frequency dependence has not been noticed so
far."....Nanopoulos says that if the frequency-dependence of the speed
of light is further confirmed by other experiments, the theory of
relativity would still be valid under certain circumstances. "There is
nothing wrong with Einstein's theory of relativity. If the energy of
an object is much smaller than 1019 proton masses or if the distance
between two objects is smaller than millions of light-years,
Einstein's equations are still valid," he says."

Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com