Einsteinian physics: The speed of light falling in gravity DECREASES:

"The change in speed of light with change in height is dc/dh=g/c." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJ2SVPahBzg

"Contrary to intuition, the speed of light (properly defined) decreases as the black hole is approached. [...] If the photon, the 'particle' of light, is thought of as behaving like a massive object, it would indeed be accelerated to higher speeds as it falls toward a black hole. However, the photon has no mass and so behaves in a manner that is not intuitively obvious." http://www.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/ae13.cfm

"Simply put: Light appears to travel slower near bigger mass (in stronger gravitational fields)." https://speed-of-light.com/speed_of_light_gravity.html

"Thus, as φ becomes increasingly negative (i.e., as the magnitude of the potential increases), the radial "speed of light" c_r defined in terms of the Schwarzschild parameters t and r is reduced to less than the nominal value of c." https://www.mathpages.com/rr/s6-01/6-01.htm

Newtonian physics: The speed of light falling in gravity INCREASES. This is so obvious that physicists often admit it explicitly, ignoring for a while Divine Albert's Divine Theory:

James Hartle, Gravity: An Introduction to Einstein's General Relativity, p. 113: "Light falls in a gravitational field with the same acceleration as material bodies." https://www.amazon.com/Gravity-Introduction-Einsteins-General-Relativity/dp/0805386629

"We conclude, therefore, that A BEAM OF LIGHT WILL ACCELERATE IN A GRAVITATIONAL FIELD AS DO OBJECTS WITH REST MASS. For example, near the surface of Earth light will fall with acceleration 9.8 m/s^2." http://web.pdx.edu/~pmoeck/books/Tipler_Llewellyn.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. Consider a light beam that is travelling away from a gravitational field. Its frequency should shift to lower values. This is known as the gravitational red shift of light." https://courses.physics.illinois.edu/phys419/sp2011/lectures/Lecture13/L13r.html

Albert Einstein Institute: "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://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/redshift_white_dwarfs.html

R. V. Pound and J. L. Snider, Effect of Gravity on Gamma Radiation: "It is not our purpose here to enter into the many-sided discussion of the relationship between the effect under study and general relativity or energy conservation. It is to be noted that no strictly relativistic concepts are involved and the description of the effect as an "apparent weight" of photons is suggestive. The velocity difference predicted is identical to that which a material object would acquire in free fall for a time equal to the time of flight." http://virgo.lal.in2p3.fr/NPAC/relativite_fichiers/pound.pdf

See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

Pentcho Valev

On Monday, January 2, 2023 at 3:39:36 PM UTC-8, pva...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Einsteinian physics: The speed of light falling in gravity DECREASES:
>
> "The change in speed of light with change in height is dc/dh=g/c." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJ2SVPahBzg
>
> "Contrary to intuition, the speed of light (properly defined) decreases as the black hole is approached. [...] If the photon, the 'particle' of light, is thought of as behaving like a massive object, it would indeed be accelerated to higher speeds as it falls toward a black hole. However, the photon has no mass and so behaves in a manner that is not intuitively obvious." http://www.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/ae13.cfm
>
> "Simply put: Light appears to travel slower near bigger mass (in stronger gravitational fields)." https://speed-of-light.com/speed_of_light_gravity.html
>
> "Thus, as φ becomes increasingly negative (i.e., as the magnitude of the potential increases), the radial "speed of light" c_r defined in terms of the Schwarzschild parameters t and r is reduced to less than the nominal value of c." https://www.mathpages.com/rr/s6-01/6-01.htm
>
> Newtonian physics: The speed of light falling in gravity INCREASES. This is so obvious that physicists often admit it explicitly, ignoring for a while Divine Albert's Divine Theory:
>
> James Hartle, Gravity: An Introduction to Einstein's General Relativity, p. 113: "Light falls in a gravitational field with the same acceleration as material bodies." https://www.amazon.com/Gravity-Introduction-Einsteins-General-Relativity/dp/0805386629
>
> "We conclude, therefore, that A BEAM OF LIGHT WILL ACCELERATE IN A GRAVITATIONAL FIELD AS DO OBJECTS WITH REST MASS. For example, near the surface of Earth light will fall with acceleration 9.8 m/s^2." http://web.pdx.edu/~pmoeck/books/Tipler_Llewellyn.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. Consider a light beam that is travelling away from a gravitational field. Its frequency should shift to lower values. This is known as the gravitational red shift of light." https://courses.physics.illinois.edu/phys419/sp2011/lectures/Lecture13/L13r.html
>
> Albert Einstein Institute: "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://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/redshift_white_dwarfs.html
>
> R. V. Pound and J. L. Snider, Effect of Gravity on Gamma Radiation: "It is not our purpose here to enter into the many-sided discussion of the relationship between the effect under study and general relativity or energy conservation. It is to be noted that no strictly relativistic concepts are involved and the description of the effect as an "apparent weight" of photons is suggestive. The velocity difference predicted is identical to that which a material object would acquire in free fall for a time equal to the time of flight." http://virgo.lal.in2p3.fr/NPAC/relativite_fichiers/pound.pdf
>
> See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev
>
> Pentcho Valev

Anything to show for your ca. 30 years of posting idiocies to the Inetrnet?

--
Jan

Another crucial difference. See Doppler effect - when an observer moves towards a stationary light source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bg7O4rtlwEE.

Einsteinian physics: The motion of the observer changes the distance between subsequent light pulses, inversely proportionally to the frequency change, so that the speed of the pulses relative to the observer can gloriously remain constant, in accordance with the formula (frequency at observer)=(speed of light pulses relative to observer)/(distance between subsequent pulses).

Newtonian physics: The motion of the observer does not change the distance between subsequent light pulses. The speed of the pulses relative to the observer varies proportionally to the frequency change, in accordance with the formula (frequency at observer)=(speed of light pulses relative to observer)/(distance between subsequent pulses).

More here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

Pentcho Valev

On 2023-01-03 03:29:30 +0000, Jan said:

> On Monday, January 2, 2023 at 3:39:36 PM UTC-8, pva...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> Einsteinian physics: The speed of light falling in gravity DECREASES:

.... followed by the usual Valevian nonsense.
>
> Anything to show for your ca. 30 years of posting idiocies to the Inetrnet?

I first knew of Pentcho 30 years ago. At that time he seemed to be
mainly concerned with what he claimed to be the falseness of the 2nd
law of thermodynamics (I didn't know of his obsession with Einstein at
that time), and he was willing to engage with his critics, and even
carried out an experiment that was suggested. Now he seems to ignore
replies to his nonsense completely. It's probably not worth while to
attempt, though I do like to draw attention to his lies (of omission,
mainly).

--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 36+ years; mainly
in England until 1987.