The possibilty of an infinite Einstein shift (of light's wavelength in
the gravity of a Black Hole) creating a photon without energy is null.
From Special Relativity one can see this is wrong. There is no such
thing as an infinite redshift. This would require a velocity of the
speed of light.
From Special Relativity this is all well and clear; but in General
Relativity
it is not.
Matter falling at the speed of light is a problem. There thus has to
be
a maximum limit to gravity's strength.
The maximum strength corresponds to a light speed acceleration
equivalence(from Einstein's equivalence of gravity and acceleration.)
Gravity's strength cannot grow without limit for a given mass.
Weight, though, could grow without limit - but only by adding more
mass.

Acceleration is limited therefore by equivalence gravity must be.
Once the limit of the strength of gravity is recognized an infinite
redshift is thus eliminated.

Mitchell wrote:
The possibilty of an infinite Einstein shift (of light's wavelength in
the gravity of a Black Hole) creating a photon without energy is null.

Hmmm. Simply making wild claims like this is not physics.


From Special Relativity one can see this is wrong. There is no such
thing as an infinite redshift. This would require a velocity of the
speed of light.

Special relativity is unable to describe anything about black holes --
their presence violates the assumptions that went in to the theory. Yes,
the predicted properties of black holes are inconsistent with SR -- so what?


From Special Relativity this is all well and clear; but in General
Relativity
it is not.

Yes, in GR it is quite clear: as a light source approaches the horizon
of a black hole the light it emits becomes increasingly redshifted to an
observer far away at rest wrt the black hole. This redshift increases
without bound as the source approaches the horizon, and once the source
crosses the horizon any light it emits can never reach the distant observer.


Matter falling at the speed of light is a problem. There thus has to
be
a maximum limit to gravity's strength.

Those are unrelated statements, and neither one is relevant to GR. In GR
matter never falls at the speed of light RELATIVE TO A LOCAL INERTIAL
OBSERVER. And in GR there is no limit to the "strength of gravity", as
long as one defines that phrase in a reasonable way.


The maximum strength corresponds to a light speed acceleration
equivalence(from Einstein's equivalence of gravity and acceleration.)

That makes no sense -- acceleration is not any sort of speed, nor any
sensible "measure of the strength of gravity" (to be well defined such a
measure must be an invariant, and for gravity the 4-acceleration of any
test particle is 0).


Gravity's strength cannot grow without limit for a given mass.
Weight, though, could grow without limit - but only by adding more
mass.

Again, simply making such wild claims is not physics.


Tom ROberts

Tom Roberts wrote in message ...
Mitchell wrote:
The possibilty of an infinite Einstein shift (of light's wavelength in
the gravity of a Black Hole) creating a photon without energy is null.

Hmmm. Simply making wild claims like this is not physics.


From Special Relativity one can see this is wrong. There is no such
thing as an infinite redshift. This would require a velocity of the
speed of light.

Special relativity is unable to describe anything about black holes --
their presence violates the assumptions that went in to the theory. Yes,
the predicted properties of black holes are inconsistent with SR -- so what?


From Special Relativity this is all well and clear; but in General
Relativity
it is not.

Yes, in GR it is quite clear: as a light source approaches the horizon
of a black hole the light it emits becomes increasingly redshifted to an
observer far away at rest wrt the black hole. This redshift increases
without bound as the source approaches the horizon, and once the source
crosses the horizon any light it emits can never reach the distant observer.


Matter falling at the speed of light is a problem. There thus has to
be
a maximum limit to gravity's strength.

Those are unrelated statements, and neither one is relevant to GR. In GR
matter never falls at the speed of light RELATIVE TO A LOCAL INERTIAL
OBSERVER. And in GR there is no limit to the "strength of gravity", as
long as one defines that phrase in a reasonable way.


The maximum strength corresponds to a light speed acceleration
equivalence(from Einstein's equivalence of gravity and acceleration.)

That makes no sense -- acceleration is not any sort of speed, nor any
sensible "measure of the strength of gravity" (to be well defined such a
measure must be an invariant, and for gravity the 4-acceleration of any
test particle is 0).


Gravity's strength cannot grow without limit for a given mass.
Weight, though, could grow without limit - but only by adding more
mass.

Again, simply making such wild claims is not physics.


Tom ROberts

Thankyou for responding to my wild claims.

gravity Should be understood as an acceleration equivalent. And
acceleration is a limited thing.
Mitch