With the new research the theory has been tested on a cosmological scale for the first time by analyzing galaxies in galaxy clusters in the distant universe. You're confusing the time dimension with spatial curvature.Until now, the gravitational redshift has only been tested with experiments and observations in relation to distances her on Earth and in relation to the solar system. To draw the time dilation properly you have to do it on a 'bent' piece of paper, a 'funnel'! I was soon intimidated by how brilliant he was that's for sure. It was a pleasure to actuall chat with him. I can always get Robert Pound's opinion on what his experiment means if you'd like? He's a wonderful gentlemen. Ps - I plan on being at Harvard soon to discuss something me and one of their physics profs are working on. It was by this gentleman named Albert Einstein. You did read that before "correcting" me right? I assumed you read my web page before you criticized what I was saying since I was exxtremely clear on what I was speaking about regarding energy. In any case I hold that I was overly clear on what I meant by all that I said here. Unless you call the principle of energy conservation a "philosophy." Einsteins 1911 paper On the influence of the gravitation on the propagation of light is online somewhere but as I recall I provided that derivation in the above link. But guess what pervect?! Einstein's equations in which he derived what Robert Pound was testing at Harvard, show that, when the equivalence principle is employed, the energy of the photon is conserved! As I said before - This is not my "philosophy" this is simply fact. The exeperiment (whose publication is around here somewhere) was to verify Einstein's derivation of a particular result. This is an experiment designed to measure locally measured energy as I recall. If we take the "Harvard tower" experiment as an example, where we have a Mossenbauer x-ray of a very well defined frequency emitted at the top of a tower, we can say that the Mossenbauer receiver (which is of necessity tuned to the exact same frequency as the transmitter, in the sense that the frequency cannot be adjusted) will NOT detect the photon emitted at the top of the tower. Ps - I refuse to dumb down since I consider it an insult to the person trying to learn. What part of Okun et al's article do you object with (since he and I agree, for very goo reasons too). In this sense it is dt that does not change but d\tau (proper time as measured by a clock which is recieving the light) that changes with position. This can be interpreted as kinetic energy. Your philosophy states that the only energy to be spoken of in the Grail of gravitational redshift is the locally measured energy. But please don't claim that I'm the lone gunman in this since I just posted an AJP article which agrees with me. I understand your philosophy so don't get me wrong.
\nu(r) = \nu_0 do not depend on time) then the energy of the particle is conserved. My analysis of grs can be found in gr-qc/0302088]The derivation of the coupling constant in the new Self Creation Cosmology pages 20 - 24.Īssuming the local conservation of energy I show that not only does the time dilation red shift, when seen by an observer 'at infinity', given by:
0 kommentar(er)
