🚀 go-pugleaf

On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 14:20:05 +0100, "Paul B. Andersen"
<paul.b.andersen@hiadeletethis.no> wrote:

>Max Keon wrote:
>> "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@guesswhatuia.no> wrote in message
>> news:47B9EB24.9070701@guesswhatuia.no...
>
>>> Please read the following carefully.
>>> We have a tower.
>>> If em-radiation is emitted from one end of the tower, and received at
>>> the other end, all frequencies must change by the exactly the same factor.
>>> That means that if the em-radiation is gamma, the frequency shift
>>> delta_f/f must be the same as when the em-radiation is RF.
>>> If the em-radiation is a series of pulses (or flashes),
>>> the repetition frequency of these flashes must also change by
>>> the same delta_f/f as above. 
>>> Now, imagine that we have a clock at each end of the tower,
>>> emitting one flash per second (let the clocks be Cs clocks,
>>> emitting one flash per SI-second).
>>> If the em-radiation going up is shifted to lower frequencies,
>>> then the observer on the top will count fewer flashes from
>>> clock at the bottom, than from his own clock. While he
>>> is counting N pulses from his own clock, he will have counted
>>> only N-n pulses from the bottom clock. This process is cumulative,
>>> so he will see that the bottom clock is lagging more and more
>>> behind his own clock. The bottom clock is running slower than
>>> the top clock.
>[..]
>> Firstly, you state that the process is cumulative, which suggest
>> to me that the frequency transmitted from a low altitude clock
>> to a more elevated clock was actually higher than is observed
>> when it arrives there. Meaning that more ticks have been
>> transmitted than are actually received. It's not possible for
>> that to continue on indefinitely unless the space between the
>> two clocks is expanding. Even if the big bang theory allowed for
>> local expansion, it would be 1/44 of that required to store the
>> missing cycles.
>
>You seem to have a serious reading comprehension problem.

...has it occurred to you that your messages might make such little sense that
NOBODY can comprehend them?

>The receiver doesn't work.
>Communication impossible.



Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

Einstein's  Relativity is easy to understand if one has the IQ of a parrot and a gullibility index >0.95.