🚀 go-pugleaf

On 29    , 00:10, Tom Roberts <tjroberts...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Sam Wormley wrote:
> > Pentcho Valev wrote:
> >> ...the speed of photons varies with the
> >> relative speed of the light source and the observer as well. Just a
> >> matter of deduction that can be presented in this way:
> >> (c'=c(1+V/c^2)) + (equivalence principle) --> (c'=c+v)
>
> >   That's cool, Pentcho
>
> Don't be sucked in by an idiot. In his leftmost equation, V is the
> NEWTONIAN GRAVITATIONAL POTENTIAL, not any velocity (check the units).
> His implication does not hold, based on logical deductions from these
> equations.
>
> > and we have empirical data, Pentcho to show
> >   whether you are right or wrong.
>
> Yes. He is wrong. That is, his leftmost equation is refuted
> experimentally, as is his right-hand equation. The implication is thus moot.
>
> Tom Roberts

Bravo Roberts bravo Tom bravo Albert Einstein of our generation
(Hawking in no longer etc.). According to the Albert Einstein of our
generation, by confirming experimentally the gravitational redshift

f'=f(1+V/c^2)

Pound and Rebka REFUTED Einstein's 1911 equation

c'=c(1+V/c^2)

Other hypnotists in Einstein criminal cult may think that the validity
of f'=f(1+V/c^2) CONFIRMS the validity of c'=c(1+V/c^2) and for that
reason those hypnotists may even TEACH Einstein's 1911 equation
c'=c(1+V/c^2) but this situation is standard in Einstein zombie world:
bellicose zombies should be programmed to know that the equation
c'=c(1+V/c^2) is BOTH true and false and to defend BOTH the truth and
the falsehood. The destruction of heretics is what matters.

And the implication is MOOT according to the Albert Einstein of our
generation:

http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~phys16/Textbook/ch13.pdf pp.2-4

Note that V=gh=cv. Substitute this in Einstein's 1911 equation
c'=c(1+V/c^2) and you obtain c'=c+v. That is what Tom Roberts, the
Albert Einstein of our generation, calls a MOOT implication.

Pentcho Valev