🚀 go-pugleaf

On Apr 10, 6:24 pm, John Polasek <jpola...@cfl.rr.com> wrote in
sci.physics.relativity:
> On Thu, 09 Apr 2009 23:31:56 -0500, Tom Roberts wrote:
> >bill wrote:
> >> On Apr 10, 5:33 am, Tom Roberts <tjroberts...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >>> Note that while A _SEES_ B tick at a slower rate, this does not imply
> >>> that clock B actually ticks at a slower rate than clock A. Indeed, in GR
> >>> this is modeled as an artifact of the COMPARISON [#], not as an effect
> >>> or modification of the clocks themselves: both clocks tick at their
> >>> usual (proper) rates, but their tick rates appear different when
> >>> situated and compared as you describe.
>
> >> So a clock that is located at sea-level does not tick over at a slower
> >> rate than an identical clock on top of a mountain?
>
> >No. Because comparing either clock in the usual way to a frequency
> >standard shows that each is ticking at its usual rate. The COMPARISON
> >via EM signals shows the lower clock is ticking slower than the higher
> >clock, so this difference is an artifact of the comparison, not of
> >either clock.
>
> In order to support your rather surprising position, it would be
> helpful to hear your version describing the results of Pound-Rebka.
> Does it involve the concept of the wave losing energy on the way up?
> What really happened there if both clocks retained their original rate
> regardless of potential?
> It is a given that both clocks taken to the same place would match.
> But there's no really good unambiguous way to compare two clocks at
> different potentials. But it should be possible to hypothesize what
> happened in Pound-Rebka, step by step, that was clearly
> self-consistent. What is your version?

This is a dangerous question and Roberts would never give a
straightforward answer. Still, quite surprisingly, some time ago Tom
Roberts did find some courage and said that the Pound-Rebka result is
consistent with Einstein's 1911 equation (an equation given by
Newton's emission theory of light and showing how the speed of light
varies with the gravitational potential):

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/1fb3e28be351d2bd

Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com