Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
EINSTEINIANA: GLORIOUS GRAVITATIONAL REDSHIFT
0 views
Skip to first unread message
Pentcho Valev
Feb 8, 2012, 2:37:29 AM2/8/12
to
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/09/galaxies-einstein-relativity/
"Galaxy Clusters Back Up Einstein's Theory of Relativity. (...) The
researchers, led by Radek Wojtak of the Niels Bohr Institute at the
University of Copenhagen, set out to test a classic prediction of
general relativity: that light will lose energy as it is escaping a
gravitational field. The stronger the field, the greater the energy
loss suffered by the light. As a result, photons emitted from the
center of a galaxy cluster - a massive object containing thousands of
galaxies - should lose more energy than photons coming from the edge
of the cluster because gravity is strongest in the center. (...) The
effect is known as gravitational redshifting."
Einsteinians,
By definition, any effect, the gravitational redshifting included,
gloriously confirms Divine Albert's Divine Theory. There can be no
doubt about that. But could the gravitational redshift somehow
interfere with the so-called cosmological redshift which also
gloriously confirms Divine Albert's Divine Theory? For instance, you
measure some huge redshift and declare that the object is very far
away from you, receding with the corresponding huge speed, but then
Halton Arp spoils the harmony in Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world by
claiming that the redshift is "intrinsic" and has nothing to do with
the expansion of the universe (an expansion which also gloriously
confirms Divine Albert's Divine Theory)? Einsteinians? Where are you?
Why don't you reply? Einsteiniana's priests (who understand the
question):
http://skipper810.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/062310_1437_couldsharia1.png?w=640
This hugely decreased frequency that you measure, Einsteinians, could
it be the result of a decreased speed of light? "The stronger the
field, the greater the energy loss suffered by the light", the lower
the coming light's speed? Divine Albert's Divine Theory teaches you
that the speed of light varies with the gravitational potential so...
Einsteinians? Now Einsteiniana's priests (who understand the question)
do reply - they sing "Lasciatemi morire":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q99q_0zcc_U&feature=related
Lasciatemi morire! Let me die! Let me die! And how can I possibly be
consoled? In this cruel fate? In this great suffering? Let me die!
Einsteiniana's zombies find that song irrelevant (they are already
dead) and offer a different reply:
http://game2gether.de/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/wall1-1280x1024-1024x819.jpg
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
"Galaxy Clusters Back Up Einstein's Theory of Relativity. (...) The
researchers, led by Radek Wojtak of the Niels Bohr Institute at the
University of Copenhagen, set out to test a classic prediction of
general relativity: that light will lose energy as it is escaping a
gravitational field. The stronger the field, the greater the energy
loss suffered by the light. As a result, photons emitted from the
center of a galaxy cluster - a massive object containing thousands of
galaxies - should lose more energy than photons coming from the edge
of the cluster because gravity is strongest in the center. (...) The
effect is known as gravitational redshifting."
Einsteinians,
By definition, any effect, the gravitational redshifting included,
gloriously confirms Divine Albert's Divine Theory. There can be no
doubt about that. But could the gravitational redshift somehow
interfere with the so-called cosmological redshift which also
gloriously confirms Divine Albert's Divine Theory? For instance, you
measure some huge redshift and declare that the object is very far
away from you, receding with the corresponding huge speed, but then
Halton Arp spoils the harmony in Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world by
claiming that the redshift is "intrinsic" and has nothing to do with
the expansion of the universe (an expansion which also gloriously
confirms Divine Albert's Divine Theory)? Einsteinians? Where are you?
Why don't you reply? Einsteiniana's priests (who understand the
question):
http://skipper810.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/062310_1437_couldsharia1.png?w=640
This hugely decreased frequency that you measure, Einsteinians, could
it be the result of a decreased speed of light? "The stronger the
field, the greater the energy loss suffered by the light", the lower
the coming light's speed? Divine Albert's Divine Theory teaches you
that the speed of light varies with the gravitational potential so...
Einsteinians? Now Einsteiniana's priests (who understand the question)
do reply - they sing "Lasciatemi morire":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q99q_0zcc_U&feature=related
Lasciatemi morire! Let me die! Let me die! And how can I possibly be
consoled? In this cruel fate? In this great suffering? Let me die!
Einsteiniana's zombies find that song irrelevant (they are already
dead) and offer a different reply:
http://game2gether.de/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/wall1-1280x1024-1024x819.jpg
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
Pentcho Valev
Feb 8, 2012, 5:21:28 AM2/8/12
to
Einsteinians feel no threat from antirelativists - Peter Hayes
explains why:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a909857880
Peter Hayes "The Ideology of Relativity: The Case of the Clock
Paradox" : Social Epistemology, Volume 23, Issue 1 January 2009, pages
57-78: "The gatekeepers of professional physics in the universities
and research institutes are disinclined to support or employ anyone
who raises problems over the elementary inconsistencies of relativity.
A winnowing out process has made it very difficult for critics of
Einstein to achieve or maintain professional status. Relativists are
then able to use the argument of authority to discredit these critics.
Were relativists to admit that Einstein may have made a series of
elementary logical errors, they would be faced with the embarrassing
question of why this had not been noticed earlier. Under these
circumstances the marginalisation of antirelativists, unjustified on
scientific grounds, is eminently justifiable on grounds of
realpolitik. Supporters of relativity theory have protected both the
theory and their own reputations by shutting their opponents out of
professional discourse."
All the threat comes from inside Einsteiniana when careless or
unfaithful Einsteinians bring grist to Newton's mill. Here is an
Einsteinian who enthusiastically proves that, in a gravitational
field, the speed of light varies exactly as the speed of cannonballs
does, in accordance with Newton's emission theory of light:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixhczNygcWo
"Relativity 3 - gravity and light"
Another Einsteinian, Fermilab physicist Dr. Ricardo Eusebi, shows how
the speed of light (relative to the observer) varies with the speed of
the observer (as predicted by Newton's emission theory of light) and
naïvely explains that the speed of light does not vary with the speed
of the observer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=EVzUyE2oD1w
"Fermilab physicist, Dr. Ricardo Eusebi, discusses the Doppler effect
and gravitational lensing in respect to Einstein's Theory of General
Relativity"
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
explains why:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a909857880
Peter Hayes "The Ideology of Relativity: The Case of the Clock
Paradox" : Social Epistemology, Volume 23, Issue 1 January 2009, pages
57-78: "The gatekeepers of professional physics in the universities
and research institutes are disinclined to support or employ anyone
who raises problems over the elementary inconsistencies of relativity.
A winnowing out process has made it very difficult for critics of
Einstein to achieve or maintain professional status. Relativists are
then able to use the argument of authority to discredit these critics.
Were relativists to admit that Einstein may have made a series of
elementary logical errors, they would be faced with the embarrassing
question of why this had not been noticed earlier. Under these
circumstances the marginalisation of antirelativists, unjustified on
scientific grounds, is eminently justifiable on grounds of
realpolitik. Supporters of relativity theory have protected both the
theory and their own reputations by shutting their opponents out of
professional discourse."
All the threat comes from inside Einsteiniana when careless or
unfaithful Einsteinians bring grist to Newton's mill. Here is an
Einsteinian who enthusiastically proves that, in a gravitational
field, the speed of light varies exactly as the speed of cannonballs
does, in accordance with Newton's emission theory of light:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixhczNygcWo
"Relativity 3 - gravity and light"
Another Einsteinian, Fermilab physicist Dr. Ricardo Eusebi, shows how
the speed of light (relative to the observer) varies with the speed of
the observer (as predicted by Newton's emission theory of light) and
naïvely explains that the speed of light does not vary with the speed
of the observer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=EVzUyE2oD1w
"Fermilab physicist, Dr. Ricardo Eusebi, discusses the Doppler effect
and gravitational lensing in respect to Einstein's Theory of General
Relativity"
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
Pentcho Valev
Feb 9, 2012, 11:20:46 AM2/9/12
to
Einsteiniana's priests inform Einsteiniana's zombies that, in a
Dr. Cristian Bahrim: "If we accept the principle of equivalence, we
must also accept that light falls in a gravitational field with the
same acceleration as material bodies."
Zombies remain silent for a while but then continue to sing, as
fiercely as possible, "Divine Einstein" and "Yes we all believe in
relativity, relativity, relativity". However Einsteiniana's priests
are merciless - now they inform zombies that light falls with twice
the acceleration of cannonballs:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/9909014v1.pdf
Steve Carlip: "It is well known that the deflection of light is twice
that predicted by Newtonian theory; in this sense, at least, light
falls with twice the acceleration of ordinary "slow" matter."
http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s6-01/6-01.htm
"Specifically, Einstein wrote in 1911 that the speed of light at a
place with the gravitational potential phi would be c(1+phi/c^2),
where c is the nominal speed of light in the absence of gravity. In
geometrical units we define c=1, so Einstein's 1911 formula can be
written simply as c'=1+phi. However, this formula for the speed of
light (not to mention this whole approach to gravity) turned out to be
incorrect, as Einstein realized during the years leading up to 1915
and the completion of the general theory. (...) ...we have c_r
=1+2phi, which corresponds to Einstein's 1911 equation, except that we
have a factor of 2 instead of 1 on the potential term."
This is unbearable to zombies. They stop singing and disintegrate:
http://rtlstatic01.host25.com/repository/images/_variations/4/d/4dad435c97f48cc1a88b4870c053530e_slideshow_bg.jpg?v=25
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
gravitational field, the speed of light varies exactly as the speed of
cannonballs does, in accordance with Newton's emission theory of
light:
http://sethi.lamar.edu/bahrim-cristian/Courses/PHYS4480/4480-PROBLEMS/optics-gravit-lens_PPT.pdf
cannonballs does, in accordance with Newton's emission theory of
light:
Dr. Cristian Bahrim: "If we accept the principle of equivalence, we
must also accept that light falls in a gravitational field with the
same acceleration as material bodies."
Zombies remain silent for a while but then continue to sing, as
fiercely as possible, "Divine Einstein" and "Yes we all believe in
relativity, relativity, relativity". However Einsteiniana's priests
are merciless - now they inform zombies that light falls with twice
the acceleration of cannonballs:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/9909014v1.pdf
Steve Carlip: "It is well known that the deflection of light is twice
that predicted by Newtonian theory; in this sense, at least, light
falls with twice the acceleration of ordinary "slow" matter."
http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s6-01/6-01.htm
"Specifically, Einstein wrote in 1911 that the speed of light at a
place with the gravitational potential phi would be c(1+phi/c^2),
where c is the nominal speed of light in the absence of gravity. In
geometrical units we define c=1, so Einstein's 1911 formula can be
written simply as c'=1+phi. However, this formula for the speed of
light (not to mention this whole approach to gravity) turned out to be
incorrect, as Einstein realized during the years leading up to 1915
and the completion of the general theory. (...) ...we have c_r
=1+2phi, which corresponds to Einstein's 1911 equation, except that we
have a factor of 2 instead of 1 on the potential term."
This is unbearable to zombies. They stop singing and disintegrate:
http://rtlstatic01.host25.com/repository/images/_variations/4/d/4dad435c97f48cc1a88b4870c053530e_slideshow_bg.jpg?v=25
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
Pentcho Valev
Feb 9, 2012, 5:00:41 PM2/9/12
to
Zombie education in Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world:
http://student.fizika.org/~jsisko/Knjige/Klasicna%20Mehanika/David%20Morin/CH13.PDF
David Morin: "The equivalence principle has a striking consequence
concerning the behavior of clocks in a gravitational field. It implies
that higher clocks run faster than lower clocks. If you put a watch on
top of a tower, and then stand on the ground, you will see the watch
on the tower tick faster than an identical watch on your wrist. When
you take the watch down and compare it to the one on your wrist, it
will show more time elapsed."
Einstein said in 1911 that the effect would take place even in a
HOMOGENEOUS gravitational field. This means that the two clocks are in
EXACTLY THE SAME immediate environment (experience EXACTLY THE SAME
gravitational field) and yet one of them runs faster than the other.
Is that true? Of course not. The above fairytale about fast and slow
clocks is part of the zombie education. Clever Einsteinians (David
Morin included) know that the clocks go at the same rate - the
gravitational redshift arises from the acceleration suffered by light
signals in a gravitational field:
http://www.amazon.com/Relativity-Its-Roots-Banesh-Hoffmann/dp/0486406768
Banesh Hoffmann: "In an accelerated sky laboratory, and therefore also
in the corresponding earth laboratory, the frequence of arrival of
light pulses is lower than the ticking rate of the upper clocks even
though all the clocks go at the same rate. (...) As a result the
experimenter at the ceiling of the sky laboratory will see with his
own eyes that the floor clock is going at a slower rate than the
ceiling clock - even though, as I have stressed, both are going at the
same rate. (...) The gravitational red shift does not arise from
changes in the intrinsic rates of clocks. It arises from what befalls
light signals as they traverse space and time in the presence of
gravitation."
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
http://student.fizika.org/~jsisko/Knjige/Klasicna%20Mehanika/David%20Morin/CH13.PDF
David Morin: "The equivalence principle has a striking consequence
concerning the behavior of clocks in a gravitational field. It implies
that higher clocks run faster than lower clocks. If you put a watch on
top of a tower, and then stand on the ground, you will see the watch
on the tower tick faster than an identical watch on your wrist. When
you take the watch down and compare it to the one on your wrist, it
will show more time elapsed."
Einstein said in 1911 that the effect would take place even in a
HOMOGENEOUS gravitational field. This means that the two clocks are in
EXACTLY THE SAME immediate environment (experience EXACTLY THE SAME
gravitational field) and yet one of them runs faster than the other.
Is that true? Of course not. The above fairytale about fast and slow
clocks is part of the zombie education. Clever Einsteinians (David
Morin included) know that the clocks go at the same rate - the
gravitational redshift arises from the acceleration suffered by light
signals in a gravitational field:
http://www.amazon.com/Relativity-Its-Roots-Banesh-Hoffmann/dp/0486406768
Banesh Hoffmann: "In an accelerated sky laboratory, and therefore also
in the corresponding earth laboratory, the frequence of arrival of
light pulses is lower than the ticking rate of the upper clocks even
though all the clocks go at the same rate. (...) As a result the
experimenter at the ceiling of the sky laboratory will see with his
own eyes that the floor clock is going at a slower rate than the
ceiling clock - even though, as I have stressed, both are going at the
same rate. (...) The gravitational red shift does not arise from
changes in the intrinsic rates of clocks. It arises from what befalls
light signals as they traverse space and time in the presence of
gravitation."
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
Pentcho Valev
Feb 22, 2012, 1:21:52 AM2/22/12
to
Recent glorious confirmation of Divine Albert's Divine Theory:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1109.6571v1.pdf
Nature 477, 567-569 (29 September 2011), Gravitational redshift of
galaxies in clusters as predicted by general relativity, Radoslaw
Wojtak, Steen H. Hansen, Jens Hjorth: "According to the theory of
general relativity, light emitted from galaxies moving in the
gravitational potential well of galaxy clusters is expected to be
redshifted proportionally to the difference in gravitational potential
phi between the clusters and an observer, i.e., z_gr = (delta phi)/
c^2, where c is the velocity of light in vacuum."
Einsteinians couldn't be more excited. Light loses frequency as it is
escaping a gravitational field, just as predicted by Divine Albert,
yes we all believe in relativity relativity relativity, and then the
observer on the Earth gloriously measures this decreased frequency,
yes we all believe in relativity relativity relativity. And even more
excitingly, Divine Albert has predicted the same effect for the speed
of light: Light loses speed as it is escaping a gravitational field,
yes we all believe in relativity relativity relativity, and then the
observer on the Earth gloriously measures this decreased speed, yes we
all believe in relativity relativity relativity:
http://www.relativitybook.com/resources/Einstein_gravity.html
Albert Einstein 1911: "If we call the velocity of light at the origin
of co-ordinates c0, then the velocity of light c at a place with the
gravitation potential phi will be given by the relation c=c0(1+phi/
c^2)."
http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s6-01/6-01.htm
"Specifically, Einstein wrote in 1911 that the speed of light at a
place with the gravitational potential phi would be c(1+phi/c^2),
where c is the nominal speed of light in the absence of gravity. In
geometrical units we define c=1, so Einstein's 1911 formula can be
written simply as c'=1+phi. However, this formula for the speed of
light (not to mention this whole approach to gravity) turned out to be
incorrect, as Einstein realized during the years leading up to 1915
and the completion of the general theory. (...) ...we have c_r
=1+2phi, which corresponds to Einstein's 1911 equation, except that we
have a factor of 2 instead of 1 on the potential term."
http://www.speed-light.info/speed_of_light_variable.htm
"Einstein wrote this paper in 1911 in German. It predated the full
formal development of general relativity by about four years. You can
find an English translation of this paper in the Dover book 'The
Principle of Relativity' beginning on page 99; you will find in
section 3 of that paper Einstein's derivation of the variable speed of
light in a gravitational potential, eqn (3). The result is:
c'=c0(1+phi/c^2) where phi is the gravitational potential relative to
the point where the speed of light co is measured......You can find a
more sophisticated derivation later by Einstein (1955) from the full
theory of general relativity in the weak field approximation....For
the 1955 results but not in coordinates see page 93, eqn (6.28):
c(r)=[1+2phi(r)/c^2]c. Namely the 1955 approximation shows a variation
in km/sec twice as much as first predicted in 1911."
Wait wait... Slow light reaches the Earth?!? But this... No this is by
no means a glorious confirmation of Divine Albert's Divine Theory...
This is rather... Help! Help! Divine Einstein! Yes we all believe in
relativity, relativity, relativity!
No help is coming and Einsteinians sing, in despair, "Lasciatemi
morire" and "When I am laid in earth":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q99q_0zcc_U&feature=related
Lasciatemi morire! Let me die! Let me die! And how can I possibly be
consoled? In this cruel fate? In this great suffering? Let me die!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVhvl-0Rm3E&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PL238DDC4254351D96
When I am laid, am laid in earth, may my wrongs create No trouble, no
trouble in, in thy breast. When I am laid, am laid in earth, may my
wrongs create No trouble, no trouble in, in thy breast. Remember me,
remember me, but ah! Forget my fate. Remember me, but ah! Forget my
fate. Remember me, remember me, but ah! Forget my fate. Remember me,
but ah! Forget my fate.
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1109.6571v1.pdf
Nature 477, 567-569 (29 September 2011), Gravitational redshift of
galaxies in clusters as predicted by general relativity, Radoslaw
Wojtak, Steen H. Hansen, Jens Hjorth: "According to the theory of
general relativity, light emitted from galaxies moving in the
gravitational potential well of galaxy clusters is expected to be
redshifted proportionally to the difference in gravitational potential
phi between the clusters and an observer, i.e., z_gr = (delta phi)/
c^2, where c is the velocity of light in vacuum."
Einsteinians couldn't be more excited. Light loses frequency as it is
escaping a gravitational field, just as predicted by Divine Albert,
yes we all believe in relativity relativity relativity, and then the
observer on the Earth gloriously measures this decreased frequency,
yes we all believe in relativity relativity relativity. And even more
excitingly, Divine Albert has predicted the same effect for the speed
of light: Light loses speed as it is escaping a gravitational field,
yes we all believe in relativity relativity relativity, and then the
observer on the Earth gloriously measures this decreased speed, yes we
all believe in relativity relativity relativity:
http://www.relativitybook.com/resources/Einstein_gravity.html
Albert Einstein 1911: "If we call the velocity of light at the origin
of co-ordinates c0, then the velocity of light c at a place with the
gravitation potential phi will be given by the relation c=c0(1+phi/
c^2)."
http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s6-01/6-01.htm
"Specifically, Einstein wrote in 1911 that the speed of light at a
place with the gravitational potential phi would be c(1+phi/c^2),
where c is the nominal speed of light in the absence of gravity. In
geometrical units we define c=1, so Einstein's 1911 formula can be
written simply as c'=1+phi. However, this formula for the speed of
light (not to mention this whole approach to gravity) turned out to be
incorrect, as Einstein realized during the years leading up to 1915
and the completion of the general theory. (...) ...we have c_r
=1+2phi, which corresponds to Einstein's 1911 equation, except that we
have a factor of 2 instead of 1 on the potential term."
"Einstein wrote this paper in 1911 in German. It predated the full
formal development of general relativity by about four years. You can
find an English translation of this paper in the Dover book 'The
Principle of Relativity' beginning on page 99; you will find in
section 3 of that paper Einstein's derivation of the variable speed of
light in a gravitational potential, eqn (3). The result is:
c'=c0(1+phi/c^2) where phi is the gravitational potential relative to
the point where the speed of light co is measured......You can find a
more sophisticated derivation later by Einstein (1955) from the full
theory of general relativity in the weak field approximation....For
the 1955 results but not in coordinates see page 93, eqn (6.28):
c(r)=[1+2phi(r)/c^2]c. Namely the 1955 approximation shows a variation
in km/sec twice as much as first predicted in 1911."
Wait wait... Slow light reaches the Earth?!? But this... No this is by
no means a glorious confirmation of Divine Albert's Divine Theory...
This is rather... Help! Help! Divine Einstein! Yes we all believe in
relativity, relativity, relativity!
No help is coming and Einsteinians sing, in despair, "Lasciatemi
morire" and "When I am laid in earth":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q99q_0zcc_U&feature=related
Lasciatemi morire! Let me die! Let me die! And how can I possibly be
consoled? In this cruel fate? In this great suffering? Let me die!
When I am laid, am laid in earth, may my wrongs create No trouble, no
trouble in, in thy breast. When I am laid, am laid in earth, may my
wrongs create No trouble, no trouble in, in thy breast. Remember me,
remember me, but ah! Forget my fate. Remember me, but ah! Forget my
fate. Remember me, remember me, but ah! Forget my fate. Remember me,
but ah! Forget my fate.
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
0 new messages