Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: CRIMESTOP IN DIVINE ALBERT'S WORLD
Replies: 1   Last Post: Oct 29, 2013 3:53 AM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 Pentcho Valev Posts: 6,212 Registered: 12/13/04
CRIMESTOP IN DIVINE ALBERT'S WORLD
Posted: Oct 28, 2013 6:55 PM

http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/redshift_white_dwarfs
Albert Einstein Institute: "One of the three classical tests for general relativity is the gravitational redshift of light or other forms of electromagnetic radiation. However, in contrast to the other two tests - the gravitational deflection of light and the relativistic perihelion shift -, you do not need general relativity to derive the correct prediction for the gravitational redshift. A combination of Newtonian gravity, a particle theory of light, and the weak equivalence principle (gravitating mass equals inertial mass) suffices. (...) The gravitational redshift was first measured on earth in 1960-65 by Pound, Rebka, and Snider at Harvard University..."

That is, Newton's emission theory of light predicts that, in a gravitational field, the speed of light varies in accordance with the equation c'=c(1+gh/c^2), and this prediction is consistent with the frequency shift f'=f(1+gh/c^2) measured by Pound and Rebka.

Einstein's general relativity predicts that, in a gravitational field, the speed of light varies in accordance with the equation................., and this prediction is also consistent with the frequency shift f'=f(1+gh/c^2) measured by Pound and Rebka.

Clever Einsteinians would not complete the above sentence. The consistency between c'=c(1+gh/c^2) and f'=f(1+gh/c^2) is so straightforward that any prediction about the speed of light different from c'=c(1+gh/c^2) would be almost obviously inconsistent with f'=f(1+gh/c^2). General relativity would be put in great danger: