Jump to content
Science Forums

Farsight

Members
  • Content Count

    483
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Farsight last won the day on December 9 2019

Farsight had the most liked content!

2 Followers

About Farsight

  • Rank
    Understanding

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    http://physicsdetective.com/
  1. It can if you know that “the energy of the gravitational field shall act gravitatively in the same way as any other kind of energy”. And that gravitational field energy, which is spatial energy, causes gravity. Spatial energy causes gravity, the expansion of space is not uniform, and conservation of energy applies. The gravitational field is akin to a pressure gradient in space. Don't forget that Einstein talked about the stress-energy tensor, and stress is directional pressure. The idea dates back to Newton: Fair use excerpt from Newton’s views on aether and gravitation by Léo
  2. It isn't nonsense. See what Einstein said: 1912: “On the other hand I am of the view that the principle of the constancy of the velocity of light can be maintained only insofar as one restricts oneself to spatio-temporal regions of constant gravitational potential”. 1913: “I arrived at the result that the velocity of light is not to be regarded as independent of the gravitational potential. Thus the principle of the constancy of the velocity of light is incompatible with the equivalence hypothesis”. 1914: “In the case where we drop the postulate of the constancy of the velocity of light, the
  3. Light doesn't curves because it "follows a geodesic". That's one of those lies-to-children told by people who don't understand gravity. Imagine you could place a 15 x 15 array of optical clocks throughout a horizontal slice of space around the Earth. Then you plot all the clock rates, such that the lower slower clock rates generate data points lower down in a 3D image, and the higher faster clock rates generate data points higher up in the 3D image. When you join the dots, your plot looks like this: It's a plot of the speed of light, and light curves wherever your plot is tilted. It's the
  4. No. I wrote them. Quantum inflow or "the waterfall analogy" is science fiction from people who have never read what Einstein said and don't understand how gravity works. So they come up with an pseudo-explanation that's just lies-to-children. Dark matter isn't the nail in the coffin of GR. Have a read of my Dark matter article and note that in 1916 Einstein said “the energy of the gravitational field shall act gravitatively in the same way as any other kind of energy”. Gravitational field energy, which is spatial energy, causes gravity, and you can't see it. By measuring an optical cl
  5. I wasn't being antagonistic towards you Flummoxed. I was trying to explain how things are. I wrote the articles on the speed of light and how gravity works. It's simpler, but it's wrong. A gravitational field is akin to a pressure gradient in space. There is no inflow of space. A gravitational field is a place where space is non-uniform. Both Einstein and Newton talked about properties of space and light curving due to a refraction.
  6. Things like Hawking radiation and the Information paradox are based on a misunderstanding of general relativty. A gravitational field isn't curved space. It's inhomogeneous space. The inhomogeneity is non-linear, so when you plot your measurements of space and time, your plot is curved. But space isn't. A lot of what you hear about these days concerning general relativity and gravity contradicts Einstein, and is wrong. It's as if people like Penrose were just making it up in the 1960s.
  7. This is why Hazel doesn't understand gravity. Einstein's explanation is now dismissed as non-mainstream by people who have never read the Einstein digital papers, and who don't know how gravity works. Here's some more Einstein quotes. 1912: “On the other hand I am of the view that the principle of the constancy of the velocity of light can be maintained only insofar as one restricts oneself to spatio-temporal regions of constant gravitational potential”. 1913: “I arrived at the result that the velocity of light is not to be regarded as independent of the gravitational potential. Thus the
  8. You need to read what Einstein said, Hazel. A book will tell you fairy stories about curved space, and won't tell you how gravity works. See the second paragraph below:
  9. You don't need a book, Hazel. Gravity is easy. Einstein explained most of it in his 1920 Leyden Address. A concentration of energy in the guise of a massive star conditions the surrounding space, making it “neither homogeneous nor isotropic”, this effect diminishing with distance. As a result the speed of light varies. So light curves downwards like sonar waves curve downwards in the sea, because there’s a vertical gradient in wave speed. Then matter falls down because of the wave nature of matter. That started with Louis de Broglie’s 1923 letter to Nature on waves and quanta, where he said “t
  10. Here's Einstein talking about the speed of light varying in 1920 in the Einstein digital papers: Here's Irwin Shapiro saying the same in his Shapiro Delay paper dating from 1961: There's also contemporary references such as Ned Wright's Deflection and Delay of Light: "In a very real sense, the delay experienced by light passing a massive object is responsible for the deflection of the light". Another one is Is The Speed of Light Everywhere the Same? by PhysicsFAQ editor Don Koks: "Einstein talked about the speed of light changing in his new theory. In the English translation of his 1920
  11. That author was Einstein. The hard scientific evidence of NIST optical clocks says he's correct. But you want to carry on believing in the crackpot stuff that flatly contradicts Einstein and the evidence. The sort of lost-in-maths quackery which demands negative-energy particles and predicts wormholes along with the parallel antiverse and time travel. Good luck with that Victor. Obviously I can't persuade you to be empirical and logical, just as I can't persuade the people who believe in Heaven and Hell and Sweet Baby Jesus. Over and Out.
  12. No, it varies in a gravitational field. This means pretty much everything Penrose ever said about black holes is wrong. Make sure you read what Einstein said: 1912: “On the other hand I am of the view that the principle of the constancy of the velocity of light can be maintained only insofar as one restricts oneself to spatio-temporal regions of constant gravitational potential”. 1913: “I arrived at the result that the velocity of light is not to be regarded as independent of the gravitational potential. Thus the principle of the constancy of the velocity of light is incompatible with the eq
  13. Sorry Victor, but I don't think anything Penrose said about black holes is correct. I think Oppenheimer and Snyder's 1939 frozen star paper was largely correct. See their paper on continued gravitational contraction. The black hole is a frozen star where the speed of light is zero. And if the black hole is spinning at half the speed of light, well, half of zero is zero.
  14. Relativistic jets have been observed. But that doesn't mean the Penrose process is correct. Have you ever actually read up on the Penrose process? Take a look at this: In the process, a lump of matter entering the ergosphere is triggered to split into two parts. For example, the matter might be made of two parts that separate by firing an explosive or rocket which pushes its halves apart. The momentum of the two pieces of matter when they separate can be arranged so that one piece escapes from the black hole (it "escapes to infinity"), whilst the other falls past the event horizon into the
  15. So is the Penrose process. Google on Penrose crackpot.
×
×
  • Create New...