🚀 go-pugleaf

Dr. Henri Wilson skrev:
> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 22:05:29 +0100, "Paul B. Andersen"
> <paul.b.andersen@guesswhatuia.no> wrote:
> 
>> Dr. Henri Wilson skrev:
>>> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 13:38:22 +0100, "Paul B. Andersen"
>>> <paul.b.andersen@guesswhatuia.no> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dr. Henri Wilson skrev:
>>>>> On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 14:58:42 +0100, "Paul B. Andersen"
>>>>> <paul.b.andersen@guesswhatuia.no> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Dr. Henri Wilson skrev:
>>>>>>> There is a simple reason why the GR redshift is the same as the BaTh one.
>>>>>>> Along with the rest of its insanity, GR distorts space so that falling light
>>>>>>> retains a constant light speed whilst BaTh does not promote such a delusion.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The end result is naturally the same....so are the equations.
>>>>>> PBA:
>>>>>> | You can't make a continuous wave increase its frequency
>>>>>> | by speeding it up. It is the wavelength that will change.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HW:
>>>>>> | Correct, I demonstrated that with my animation
>>>>>> | http://www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/fallingwave.exe
>>>>>>
>>>>>> PBA:
>>>>>> | So you agree that "falling light" and the BaTh can't explain
>>>>>> | the gravitational frequency shift.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HW:
>>>>>> | Yes...for individual photons but not radio signals.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's why it is _blatantly_ obvious to anyone with some measure
>>>>>> of intelligence that since frequencies and wavelengths factually
>>>>>> are gravitationally shifted, Galilean relativity is falsified.
>>>>> Where is the believable evidence that radio signals are doppler shifted due to
>>>>> 'falling'? You have none.
>>>> And the reason why the observed gravitational frequency shift
>>>> of the radio signals from gravity probe A isn't 'believable' is:
>>>>
>>>>> How many band pass filters are accurate to 10^-11.
>>>> .. the bandpass filters in the gravity probe A experiment
>>>> changed the frequency of the received signal.
>>>> Wonderland fairies in the filters inserted extra cycles.
>>>> Right? :-)
>>>>
>>>> Keep it up, Henri.
>>>> I am sure you can do even better.
>>>> The sky is the limit! :-)
>>> How much does the 'finely tuned cavity' change in free fall? 
>>>
>>> Certainly more than 1 in 10^10 
>>
>> The 'bandpass filter changing the frequency' didn't work.
> 
> Are you deliberately trying to act like a moron, out of sheer desperation?
> 
>> So what else can we blame it on?
> 
> How would you know if a 1000mhz radio signal from a space capsule was blue
> shifted by 4 parts in 10^11 or not?

The obvious way. Piece of cake. Even you know how, don't you?

>> Ah.
>> 'The finely tuned cavity' which determine the frequency
>> of the hyperfine transition in the hydrogen maser of course!
> 
> Any oscillator can be run off resonance.

Quite.
The Hydrogen maser in gravity probe A could indeed
'run off resonance' by up to one part in 10^14.

>> Well done, Henri.
>> This was indeed even better.
>>
>> But keep keeping it up, Henri.
>> I am sure you can do even better.
>> You have reached the Moon, but the sky is the limit!
> 
> You obviously have no sensible answer.
> The cavity becomes detuned in free fall.

Of course, Henri.
And what's more; the 'free fall detuning' depend
on the altitude and speed exactly as predicted by GR.
Accidental, of course.

> So?

So your ignorance shows.

This was a disappointing performance, Henri.
Out of ideas?

I am sure you can do better than this.
Remember, the sky is the limit.
Go for it!

-- 
Paul

http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/