Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #371363 > unrolled thread

NO WARPED SPACETIME

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

Contents

  NO WARPED SPACETIME Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-03 04:17 -0800
    Re: NO WARPED SPACETIME Carl Heinz Krüger <heinzkrueger@ubernetz.org> - 2015-12-03 14:34 +0000
      Re: NO WARPED SPACETIME Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2015-12-03 17:23 +0100
        Re: NO WARPED SPACETIME Carl Heinz Krüger <heinzkrueger@ubernetz.org> - 2015-12-03 16:58 +0000
    Re: NO WARPED SPACETIME JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-12-03 11:35 -0800
      Re: NO WARPED SPACETIME Carl Heinz Krüger <heinzkrueger@ubernetz.org> - 2015-12-03 19:55 +0000
    Re: NO WARPED SPACETIME Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-05 08:03 -0800
      Re: NO WARPED SPACETIME Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-05 14:18 -0800

#371363 — NO WARPED SPACETIME

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHG-t9l_x70 
 General Relativity at the Beach

My comment on the video:

There is no warped spacetime. Scientists measure the gravitational redshift but inform the gullible world that they have proved gravitational time dilation, a miraculous effect fabricated by Einstein in 1911: 

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/einsteins-gravitational-redshift-measured-with-unprecedented-precision/ 
 "A new paper co-authored by U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu measures the gravitational redshift, illustrated by the gravity-induced slowing of a clock and sometimes referred to as gravitational time dilation (though users of that term often conflate two separate phenomena), a measurement that jibes with Einstein and that is 10,000 times more precise than its predecessor." 

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/apr/22/record-breaking-clock-invented-which-only-loses-a-second-in-15-billion-years 
 "Einstein's relativity theory states a clock must tick faster at the top of a mountain than at its foot, due to the effects of gravity. "Our performance means that we can measure the gravitational shift when you raise the clock just two centimetres (0.78 inches) on the Earth's surface," said study co-author Jun Ye." 

The gravitational redshift (blueshift) is not the result of time dilation - it is the result of the variation of the speed of light predicted by Newton's emission theory of light: 

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..." 

http://courses.physics.illinois.edu/phys419/sp2013/Lectures/l13.pdf 
 University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign: "Consider a falling object. ITS SPEED INCREASES AS IT IS FALLING. Hence, if we were to associate a frequency with that object the frequency should increase accordingly as it falls to earth. Because of the equivalence between gravitational and inertial mass, WE SHOULD OBSERVE THE SAME EFFECT FOR LIGHT. So lets shine a light beam from the top of a very tall building. If we can measure the frequency shift as the light beam descends the building, we should be able to discern how gravity affects a falling light beam. This was done by Pound and Rebka in 1960. They shone a light from the top of the Jefferson tower at Harvard and measured the frequency shift. The frequency shift was tiny but in agreement with the theoretical prediction." 

http://www.printsasia.com/book/relativity-and-its-roots-banesh-hoffmann-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

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#371365

суббота., Thu, 03 Dec 2015 04:17:22 -0800 пользователь Pentcho Valev
написал:

> There is no warped spacetime. Scientists measure the gravitational
> redshift but inform the gullible world that they have proved
> gravitational time dilation, a miraculous effect fabricated by Einstein
> in 1911:

I come to realize that in Divergent Matter if an interstellar gravity 
propelled vehicle would generate, say 2g, than coming close to Earth will 
make people just fall into their vehicle naturally. By focusing over a 
certain area of course. A generator putting out 1g would make you levitate.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#371368

Op 03-dec-2015 om 15:34 schreef Carl Heinz Krüger:
> суббота., Thu, 03 Dec 2015 04:17:22 -0800 пользователь Pentcho Valev
> написал:
>
>> There is no warped spacetime. Scientists measure the gravitational
>> redshift but inform the gullible world that they have proved
>> gravitational time dilation, a miraculous effect fabricated by Einstein
>> in 1911:
>
> I come to realize that in Divergent Matter

Pretending to be an idiot advocating Divergent Matter, is 
counterproductive. The only thing that you accomplish, is
that you make well meaning--but naive--people to waste
their time rebuking you.

Dirk Vdm

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#371372

суббота., Thu, 03 Dec 2015 17:23:33 +0100 пользователь Dirk Van de moortel
написал:

> Op 03-dec-2015 om 15:34 schreef Carl Heinz Krüger:
>> суббота., Thu, 03 Dec 2015 04:17:22 -0800 пользователь Pentcho Valev
>> написал:
>>
>>> There is no warped spacetime. Scientists measure the gravitational
>>> redshift but inform the gullible world that they have proved
>>> gravitational time dilation, a miraculous effect fabricated by
>>> Einstein in 1911:
>>
>> I come to realize that in Divergent Matter
> 
> Pretending to be an idiot advocating Divergent Matter, is
> counterproductive. The only thing that you accomplish, is that you make
> well meaning--but naive--people to waste their time rebuking you.

It's okay. You are not ready for Divergent Matter yet. However, be 
prepared. Just in case. I know that I am.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#371384

On Thursday, December 3, 2015 at 4:17:26 AM UTC-8, Pentcho Valev wrote:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHG-t9l_x70 
>  General Relativity at the Beach
> 
> My comment on the video:
> 
> There is no warped spacetime. 

"There is no phase space." See? An equally pointless statement, both are
not even wrong.

--
Jan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#371385

суббота., Thu, 03 Dec 2015 11:35:25 -0800 пользователь JanPB написал:

> On Thursday, December 3, 2015 at 4:17:26 AM UTC-8, Pentcho Valev wrote:
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHG-t9l_x70
>>  General Relativity at the Beach
>> 
>> My comment on the video:
>> 
>> There is no warped spacetime.
> 
> "There is no phase space." See? An equally pointless statement, both are
> not even wrong.

This might be 4½ hours too long, but it may make sense in Divergent 
Matter. In Relativity a "warped spacetime" is void of characteristics, 
except one, making it suitable to an absurd particular prediction.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#371463

Brian Greene explains how in 1919 Einstein's general relativity was gloriously confirmed:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFFaCY3mZsk 
 What convinced physicists that General Relativity was correct?

In another video, at 22:39, Steven Weinberg and Brian Greene are telling the truth: Eddington's 1919 eclipse experiment was a fraud:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EOpHHjv5g8 
 Brian Greene Hosts: Reality Since Einstein

Pentcho Valev

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#371467

On Saturday, December 5, 2015 at 9:03:56 AM UTC-7, Pentcho Valev wrote:
>
> Brian Greene explains how in 1919 Einstein's general relativity was
> gloriously confirmed:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFFaCY3mZsk 
>  What convinced physicists that General Relativity was correct?
> 
> In another video, at 22:39, Steven Weinberg and Brian Greene are telling
> the truth: Eddington's 1919 eclipse experiment was a fraud:

Regurgitated Valovian baloney

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EOpHHjv5g8 
>  Brian Greene Hosts: Reality Since Einstein
> 
> Pentcho Valev

"Some" people claim Eddington fudged the data, but the truth is:

http://w.astro.berkeley.edu/~kalas/labs/documents/kennefick_phystoday_09.pdf

Once again Prevaricating Pentcho is caught lying.

Gary

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web