On Apr 19, 6:57*am, Pentcho Valev wrote:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...rowse_frm/thre...
"Redshift - Does wavelength change?"


Light's waving speeds up in gravity. Its speed diminishes.
This is Pound Rebka.

Mitch Raemsch; Twice Nobel Laureate 2008

Dear Darwin123:

"Darwin123" wrote in message
...
....
Furthermore, there is no foreign dialect where
"silly" and "irreversible" could be used in the
same sentence.

Pentcho looks silly with his irreversible belt on wrong side out.
Pentcho semble ridicule avec sa ceinture irréversibles sur les
mauvais côté.
Pentcho ziet er gek met zijn band op onomkeerbare verkeerde kant
uit.
Pentcho sieht doof mit seinem irreversiblen Gürtel in falschen
Seite aus.
Pentcho parece tonto con su cinturón en irreversible lado
equivocado a cabo.

.... or something like that.

David A. Smith

On Sat, 10 May 2008 00:40:50 +0100, "Androcles"
wrote:


"Dr. Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
.. .

| Wilson said
| "For one ray, ct = 2piR+vt , for the other ct = 2piR-vt. This gives t =
| 2piR/(c+v) and 2piR/(c-v)" -- Wilson.
| ...
|
| Dead wrong Wilson
|
| ...pretty simple algebra, if you ask me.....
|
| ...But the mind of a pommie engineer works in strange ways.

vt is straight line, 2PiR is the circumference of a circle.
Adding them is ridiculous.
The mind of an aussie sheep shagger works in strange ways.

vt is near enought to straght.



Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

.....specialising in teaching physics to engineers and mathematicians....

"Dr. Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
...
| On Sat, 10 May 2008 00:40:50 +0100, "Androcles"

| wrote:
|
|
| "Dr. Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
| .. .
|
| | Wilson said
| | "For one ray, ct = 2piR+vt , for the other ct = 2piR-vt. This gives t
=
| | 2piR/(c+v) and 2piR/(c-v)" -- Wilson.
| | ...
| |
| | Dead wrong Wilson
| |
| | ...pretty simple algebra, if you ask me.....
| |
| | ...But the mind of a pommie engineer works in strange ways.
|
| vt is straight line, 2PiR is the circumference of a circle.
| Adding them is ridiculous.
| The mind of an aussie sheep shagger works in strange ways.
|
| vt is near enought to straght.

ct is so near to straight that it almost completes a circle.
For one ray, (c+v)t = (2pi+alpha)R, for the other (c-v)t = (2pi-alpha)R.

t is the same in both cases, only the distance changes.

Ewe are near enough to a sheep, ewe have the same mathematical
abilities as one. The drunken mind of an aussie sheep shagger works
in strange ways, making two spelling mistakes in one sentence,
"enought" and "straght".

On May 9, 2:41*am, Pentcho Valev wrote:
On May 8, 10:29*pm, Pentcho Valev wrote:





Although Silly Vesselin Petkov was very close to the truth:

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9810030v13
Silly Vesselin Petkov: "It has been overlooked that the wavelength of
a photon in the gravitational redshift experiment cannot change along
with its frequency due to the conservation of the photon momentum. As
both frequency and velocity change in this experiment the measurement
of a change in a photon frequency is in fact an indirect measurement
of a change in the photon local velocity."

Criminal Tom Roberts managed to confuse him irreversibly and now Silly
Vesselin Petkov is very far from the truth. Here is an Einsteinian
that Criminal Tom Roberts has not confused yet so this particular
Einsteinian is still very close to the truth:

http://www.blazelabs.com/f-g-gcont.asp"The first confirmation of a
long range variation in the speed of light travelling in space came in
1964. Irwin Shapiro, it seems, was the first to make use of a
previously forgotten facet of general relativity theory -- that the
speed of light is reduced when it passes through a gravitational
field....Faced with this evidence, Einstein stated:"In the second
place our result shows that, according to the general theory of
relativity, the law of the constancy of the velocity of light in
vacuo, which constitutes one of the two fundamental assumptions in the
special theory of relativity and to which we have already frequently
referred, cannot claim any unlimited validity. A curvature of rays of
light can only take place when the velocity of propagation of light
varies with position."......Today we find that since the Special
Theory of Relativity unfortunately became part of the so called
mainstream science, it is considered a sacrilege to even suggest that
the speed of light be anything other than a constant. This is somewhat
surprising since even Einstein himself suggested in a paper "On the
Influence of Gravitation on the Propagation of Light," Annalen der
Physik, 35, 1911, that the speed of light might vary with the
gravitational potential. Indeed, the variation of the speed of light
in a vacuum or space is explicitly shown in Einstein's calculation for
the angle at which light should bend upon the influence of gravity.
One can find his calculation in his paper. The result is c'=c(1+V/c^2)
where V is the gravitational potential relative to the point where the
measurement is taken. 1+V/c^2 is also known as the GRAVITATIONAL
REDSHIFT FACTOR."

So if Criminal Tom Roberts had not confused Silly Vesselin Petkov so
irreversibly, Silly Vesselin Petkov could say to Silly Ian Morison:

http://fora.tv/2008/02/21/Ian_Moriso...vity_in_Action

Silly Vesselin Petkov: "Hey, Silly Ian Morison, Pound and Rebka did
not prove the existence of any gravitational time dilation! Rather,
although they did not know it, they proved the validity of Einstein's
1911 equation c'=c(1+V/c^2) showing how the speed of light varies with
the gravitaional potential V. If they had known how to apply
Einstein's equivalence principle in such cases, they would also have
shown the validity of the equation c'=c+v given by Newton's emission
theory of light, where v is the relative speed of the light source and
the observer."

Silly Vesselin Petkov will never say that to Silly Ian Morison because
Criminal Tom Roberts managed to confuse him irreversibly.


I think everything about theories should be ok in the ngs, even
trolling, but yet I recommend not characterizing anyone as criminal,
especially Roberts, with whom I have had many arguments with but he is
a good scienstist and does nto deserve this.

Not even Dirt van den Merde, he no criminal, he just trolling idiot.

Mike




Pentcho Valev
- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On Sun, 11 May 2008 09:56:20 +0100, "Androcles"
wrote:


"Dr. Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
.. .
| On Sat, 10 May 2008 00:40:50 +0100, "Androcles"

| | ...But the mind of a pommie engineer works in strange ways.
|
| vt is straight line, 2PiR is the circumference of a circle.
| Adding them is ridiculous.
| The mind of an aussie sheep shagger works in strange ways.
|
| vt is near enought to straght.

ct is so near to straight that it almost completes a circle.

In a ring gyro, continuous internal reflection occurs. There is an infinite
number of internal mirrors each reflecting the rays at an angle 1/infinity. The
rays effectively travel in straight lines.

For one ray, (c+v)t = (2pi+alpha)R, for the other (c-v)t = (2pi-alpha)R.

alphaR = vt, you silly old dope.
You are saying that ct = 2piR.

t is the same in both cases, only the distance changes.

Ewe are near enough to a sheep, ewe have the same mathematical
abilities as one. The drunken mind of an aussie sheep shagger works
in strange ways, making two spelling mistakes in one sentence,
"enought" and "straght".

**** off.




Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

.....specialising in teaching physics to engineers and mathematicians....

On Sun, 11 May 2008 04:13:04 -0700 (PDT), Mike wrote:

On May 9, 2:41*am, Pentcho Valev wrote:
On May 8, 10:29*pm, Pentcho Valev wrote:





Although Silly Vesselin Petkov was very close to the truth:

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9810030v13
Silly Vesselin Petkov: "It has been overlooked that the wavelength of
a photon in the gravitational redshift experiment cannot change along
with its frequency due to the conservation of the photon momentum. As
both frequency and velocity change in this experiment the measurement
of a change in a photon frequency is in fact an indirect measurement
of a change in the photon local velocity."

Criminal Tom Roberts managed to confuse him irreversibly and now Silly
Vesselin Petkov is very far from the truth. Here is an Einsteinian
that Criminal Tom Roberts has not confused yet so this particular
Einsteinian is still very close to the truth:

http://www.blazelabs.com/f-g-gcont.asp"The first confirmation of a
long range variation in the speed of light travelling in space came in
1964. Irwin Shapiro, it seems, was the first to make use of a
previously forgotten facet of general relativity theory -- that the
speed of light is reduced when it passes through a gravitational
field....Faced with this evidence, Einstein stated:"In the second
place our result shows that, according to the general theory of
relativity, the law of the constancy of the velocity of light in
vacuo, which constitutes one of the two fundamental assumptions in the
special theory of relativity and to which we have already frequently
referred, cannot claim any unlimited validity. A curvature of rays of
light can only take place when the velocity of propagation of light
varies with position."......Today we find that since the Special
Theory of Relativity unfortunately became part of the so called
mainstream science, it is considered a sacrilege to even suggest that
the speed of light be anything other than a constant. This is somewhat
surprising since even Einstein himself suggested in a paper "On the
Influence of Gravitation on the Propagation of Light," Annalen der
Physik, 35, 1911, that the speed of light might vary with the
gravitational potential. Indeed, the variation of the speed of light
in a vacuum or space is explicitly shown in Einstein's calculation for
the angle at which light should bend upon the influence of gravity.
One can find his calculation in his paper. The result is c'=c(1+V/c^2)
where V is the gravitational potential relative to the point where the
measurement is taken. 1+V/c^2 is also known as the GRAVITATIONAL
REDSHIFT FACTOR."

So if Criminal Tom Roberts had not confused Silly Vesselin Petkov so
irreversibly, Silly Vesselin Petkov could say to Silly Ian Morison:

http://fora.tv/2008/02/21/Ian_Moriso...vity_in_Action

Silly Vesselin Petkov: "Hey, Silly Ian Morison, Pound and Rebka did
not prove the existence of any gravitational time dilation! Rather,
although they did not know it, they proved the validity of Einstein's
1911 equation c'=c(1+V/c^2) showing how the speed of light varies with
the gravitaional potential V. If they had known how to apply
Einstein's equivalence principle in such cases, they would also have
shown the validity of the equation c'=c+v given by Newton's emission
theory of light, where v is the relative speed of the light source and
the observer."

Silly Vesselin Petkov will never say that to Silly Ian Morison because
Criminal Tom Roberts managed to confuse him irreversibly.


I think everything about theories should be ok in the ngs, even
trolling, but yet I recommend not characterizing anyone as criminal,
especially Roberts, with whom I have had many arguments with but he is
a good scienstist and does nto deserve this.

Roberts has spent his lifetime becoming an expert in a theory that is wrong
from the first paragraph.....
I suppose self-delusion is only a crime when it is inflicted upon others.

Not even Dirt van den Merde, he no criminal, he just trolling idiot.

Mike







Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

.....specialising in teaching physics to engineers and mathematicians....

On May 11, 1:13*pm, Mike wrote:
On May 9, 2:41*am, Pentcho Valev wrote:





On May 8, 10:29*pm, Pentcho Valev wrote:

Although Silly Vesselin Petkov was very close to the truth:

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9810030v13
Silly Vesselin Petkov: "It has been overlooked that the wavelength of
a photon in the gravitational redshift experiment cannot change along
with its frequency due to the conservation of the photon momentum. As
both frequency and velocity change in this experiment the measurement
of a change in a photon frequency is in fact an indirect measurement
of a change in the photon local velocity."

Criminal Tom Roberts managed to confuse him irreversibly and now Silly
Vesselin Petkov is very far from the truth. Here is an Einsteinian
that Criminal Tom Roberts has not confused yet so this particular
Einsteinian is still very close to the truth:

http://www.blazelabs.com/f-g-gcont.asp" The first confirmation of a
long range variation in the speed of light travelling in space came in
1964. Irwin Shapiro, it seems, was the first to make use of a
previously forgotten facet of general relativity theory -- that the
speed of light is reduced when it passes through a gravitational
field....Faced with this evidence, Einstein stated:"In the second
place our result shows that, according to the general theory of
relativity, the law of the constancy of the velocity of light in
vacuo, which constitutes one of the two fundamental assumptions in the
special theory of relativity and to which we have already frequently
referred, cannot claim any unlimited validity. A curvature of rays of
light can only take place when the velocity of propagation of light
varies with position."......Today we find that since the Special
Theory of Relativity unfortunately became part of the so called
mainstream science, it is considered a sacrilege to even suggest that
the speed of light be anything other than a constant. This is somewhat
surprising since even Einstein himself suggested in a paper "On the
Influence of Gravitation on the Propagation of Light," Annalen der
Physik, 35, 1911, that the speed of light might vary with the
gravitational potential. Indeed, the variation of the speed of light
in a vacuum or space is explicitly shown in Einstein's calculation for
the angle at which light should bend upon the influence of gravity.
One can find his calculation in his paper. The result is c'=c(1+V/c^2)
where V is the gravitational potential relative to the point where the
measurement is taken. 1+V/c^2 is also known as the GRAVITATIONAL
REDSHIFT FACTOR."

So if Criminal Tom Roberts had not confused Silly Vesselin Petkov so
irreversibly, Silly Vesselin Petkov could say to Silly Ian Morison:

http://fora.tv/2008/02/21/Ian_Moriso...vity_in_Action

Silly Vesselin Petkov: "Hey, Silly Ian Morison, Pound and Rebka did
not prove the existence of any gravitational time dilation! Rather,
although they did not know it, they proved the validity of Einstein's
1911 equation c'=c(1+V/c^2) showing how the speed of light varies with
the gravitaional potential V. If they had known how to apply
Einstein's equivalence principle in such cases, they would also have
shown the validity of the equation c'=c+v given by Newton's emission
theory of light, where v is the relative speed of the light source and
the observer."

Silly Vesselin Petkov will never say that to Silly Ian Morison because
Criminal Tom Roberts managed to confuse him irreversibly.

I think everything about theories should be ok in the ngs, even
trolling, but yet I recommend not characterizing anyone as criminal,
especially Roberts, with whom I have had many arguments with but he is
a good scienstist and does nto deserve this.

Only a criminal can teach Einstein zombie world that, even if "light
in vacuum does not travel at the invariant speed of the Lorentz
transform", special relativity "would be unaffected":

http://groups.google.ca/group/sci.ph...34dc146100e32c
Tom Roberts, Feb 1 2006: "If it is ultimately discovered that the
photon has a nonzero mass (i.e. light in vacuum does not travel at the
invariant speed of the Lorentz transform), SR would be unaffected but
both Maxwell's equations and QED would be refuted (or rather, their
domains of applicability would be reduced)."

Pentcho Valev

"Dr. Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
...
| On Sun, 11 May 2008 09:56:20 +0100, "Androcles"

| wrote:
|
|
| "Dr. Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
| .. .
| | On Sat, 10 May 2008 00:40:50 +0100, "Androcles"
|
| | | ...But the mind of a pommie engineer works in strange ways.
| |
| | vt is straight line, 2PiR is the circumference of a circle.
| | Adding them is ridiculous.
| | The mind of an aussie sheep shagger works in strange ways.
| |
| | vt is near enought to straght.
|
| ct is so near to straight that it almost completes a circle.
|
| In a ring gyro, continuous internal reflection occurs. There is an
infinite
| number of internal mirrors each reflecting the rays at an angle
1/infinity. The
| rays effectively travel in straight lines.

Yeah, we know, circles are made of infinitesimally short straight lines. So
is every
other curve in the book and so are straight lines themselves.
The rays EFFECTIVELY travel in a circle, but you don't know what
"effective"
means, you just want to ineffectively argue that you are effectively right
when you
are just plain effectively wrong.


|
| For one ray, (c+v)t = (2pi+alpha)R, for the other (c-v)t = (2pi-alpha)R.
|
| alphaR = vt, you silly old dope.
| You are saying that ct = 2piR.

Which it does, and
(c+v)t = (2pi + alpha)R,
(c-v)t = (2pi - alpha)R.

Moreover, I can make v = c/2 and it is still correct, alpha = pi, whereas
you have a
straight line effectively subtracted from a semicircle.

Look, you stupid old sheep shagger, I know what you MEAN but all we are
debating here is the correct way to describe it algebraically.
That means no ****ing change in t, only a change in distance.

t = (2pi + alpha)R / (c+v)
t = (2pi - alpha)R / (c-v)
t = 2pi.R/c

Now we do NOT have t on both sides of the equation, but your way we do.

| t is the same in both cases, only the distance changes.
|
| Ewe are near enough to a sheep, ewe have the same mathematical
| abilities as one. The drunken mind of an aussie sheep shagger works
| in strange ways, making two spelling mistakes in one sentence,
| "enought" and "straght".
|
| **** off.

Don't you mean ****t of?

Where's Poe? He's dropped off the radar for three weeks now and I
had him on the hook, begging me to tell him the experiment that
proves SR is crap. All my ducks in a row and he vanishes.

On Mon, 12 May 2008 00:56:20 +0100, "Androcles"
wrote:


"Dr. Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
.. .
| On Sun, 11 May 2008 09:56:20 +0100, "Androcles"



|
| For one ray, (c+v)t = (2pi+alpha)R, for the other (c-v)t = (2pi-alpha)R.
|
| alphaR = vt, you silly old dope.
| You are saying that ct = 2piR.

Which it does, and
(c+v)t = (2pi + alpha)R,
(c-v)t = (2pi - alpha)R.

OK, that's viewed in the nonrotating frame. Alpha is the angle the
source/detector moves through during the time it takes for light to go around
the ring.

My equation is for the rotating frame in which both rays appear to move at c
wrt the source/detector.
ct = 2piR + alphaR
Alpha is the angle through which the STATIONARY EMISSION POINT of each 'ray
element' moves (backwards) in the rotating frame.

Relativists Roberts, Andersen et al have persistently failed to acknowlegde
that this happens...which is why their traditional refutation of BaTh using
Sagnac is a joke. They consider that viewing a rotating ringgyro in the
rotating frame is identical to a nonrotating gyro in the nonrotating frame.

Relativists belong at the arse end of Physics I'm afraid...but I'm sure you
know that already..

Moreover, I can make v = c/2 and it is still correct, alpha = pi, whereas
you have a
straight line effectively subtracted from a semicircle.

Look, you stupid old sheep shagger, I know what you MEAN but all we are
debating here is the correct way to describe it algebraically.
That means no ****ing change in t, only a change in distance.

t = (2pi + alpha)R / (c+v)
t = (2pi - alpha)R / (c-v)
t = 2pi.R/c

Now we do NOT have t on both sides of the equation, but your way we do.

| t is the same in both cases, only the distance changes.
|
| Ewe are near enough to a sheep, ewe have the same mathematical
| abilities as one. The drunken mind of an aussie sheep shagger works
| in strange ways, making two spelling mistakes in one sentence,
| "enought" and "straght".
|
| **** off.

Don't you mean ****t of?

Where's Poe? He's dropped off the radar for three weeks now and I
had him on the hook, begging me to tell him the experiment that
proves SR is crap. All my ducks in a row and he vanishes.

They usually disappear when they know they're beaten....



Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

.....specialising in teaching physics to engineers and mathematicians....