🚀 go-pugleaf

On Jan 6, 10:50 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" <dynam...@vianet.on.ca> wrote:
> On Jan 6, 2:00 am, mluttg...@wanadoo.fr wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 6, 12:01 am, Dono <sa...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 5, 1:26 pm, mluttg...@wanadoo.fr wrote:
>
> > > > Let Nu0 the observed frequency at the bottom.
> > > > Assuming that m = hNu / c^2 represents the
> > > > photon's mass corresponding to the frequency Nu,
>
> > > Bad assumption, Marcel. Doesn't apply to the photon.
> > > It is nice seeing trying mainstream physics instead of your standard
> > > fare of pure crackpottery.
>
> > The proof of the pudding is in the eating:
> > With that assumption, one straightforwardly gets
>
> > E0 = E + mgd
> >      = hNu +  (hNu / c^2) * gd
> >      = hNu (1 + gd/c^2)
> >      = E (1 + gd/c^2)
>
> > This cannot be a mere coincidence.
>
> It's not coincidence, light energy,
> like all energy is subject to the
> Conservation of Energy, and is a
> cornerstone of General Relativity.
>
> > Marcel Luttgens
>
> Good work, regards
> Ken S. Tucker

Thank you.

I have added to my demonstration a justification of
the assumption that the mass m of a photon can be
expressed by the relation m = E / c^2 = hNu / c^2:

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound-Rebka_experiment :

"The Pound-Rebka experiment is a well known experiment
to test Albert Einstein's theory of general relativity.
It was proposed by R. V. Pound and G. A. Rebka Jr.
in 1959,[1] and was the last of the classical tests of
general relativity to be verified (in the same year).
It is a gravitational redshift experiment, which measures
the redshift of light moving in a gravitational field,
or, equivalently, a test of the general relativity prediction
that clocks should run at different rates at different places
in a gravitational field. It is considered to be the
experiment that ushered in an era of precision tests
of general relativity.

The energy associated with gravitational redshift over
a distance of 22.5 meters is very small. The fractional
change in energy is given by dE/E, is equal to
gh/c2=2.5x10-15."

In fact, the result of the Pound-Rebka experiment
(a  fractional change in frequency of 2.5x10-15)
doesn't need general relativity to be explained:

Let Nu the emitted frequency at the top of the
tower of height d = 22.5 m. The corresponding
energy of the photon is E = hNu, where h is
the Plank constant.
Let Nu0 the observed frequency at the bottom.
Assuming that m = hNu / c^2 represents the
photon's mass corresponding to the frequency Nu (1),
and mgd its potential energy at the top, where
g = 9.81 m/s^2 is the Earth's gravitational
potential (assumed to be constant), the observed
energy E0 of the photon is given by

E0 = E + mgd
     = hNu +  (hNu / c^2) * gd
     = hNu (1 + gd/c^2)
     = E (1 + gd/c^2) , or
Nu0 = Nu (1 + gd/c^2)

Note that
gd/c^2 = 9.81 * 22.5 / 9E16
           =~ 2.5E-15

Clearly, the above interpretation of the result of the
Pound & Rebka experiment doesn't vindicate
the general relativity prediction that clocks should run
at different rates at different places in a gravitational field.

Marcel Luttgens

(1) Such assumption is amply justified by the experimental
fact that "The energy of a system that emits a photon is
decreased by the energy E of the photon as measured
in the rest frame of the emitting system, which may result
in a reduction in mass in the amount E / c2. Similarly,
the mass of a system that absorbs a photon is increased
by a corresponding amount."
(cf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon#Physical_properties )

Marcel Luttgens