Re: Gravitational time dilation HOAX along the years

On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 22:28:45 +0000, Ross Finlayson wrote:

On 12/17/2024 11:50 AM, rhertz wrote:

EXCERPTS FROM EINSTEIN'S 1911 PAPER:  On the Influence of Gravitation on
the Propagation of Light
>
***********************************************************************
2. On the Gravitation of Energy
........................................
We consider the process of transmission of energy by radiation from S2
to S1 from a system K0, which is free of acceleration.
..................
Therefore by the ordinary theory of relativity the radiation arriving at
S1 does not possess the energy E2, but a greater energy E1, which is
related to E2; to a rst approximation, by the equation:
>
(1)                  E1 = E2 (1 + gh/c²)
>
By our assumption exactly the same relation holds if the same process
takes place in the system K, which is not accelerated, but is provided
with a gravitational field.
>
In this case we may replace  by the potential gh of the gravitation
vector in S2, if the arbitrary constant of ɸ  in S1 is set to zero. We
then have the equation:
>
(1a)                  E1 = E2 + E2 ɸ/c²
>
This equation expresses the energy law for the process under
observation. The energy E1 arriving at S1 is greater than the energy E2,
measured by the same means, which was emitted from S2, the excess being
the potential energy of the mass E2/c² in the gravitational field. This
shows that in order to satisfy the energy principle we have to ascribe
to the energy E, before its emission from S2, a potential energy, due to
gravity, which corresponds to the (GRAVITATIONAL) MASS E/c².
.....................................
3. Time and the Velocity of Light in the Gravitational Field
>
If the radiation emitted in the uniformly accelerated system K0 in S2
toward S1 had the frequency f2 relative to the clock at S2, then,
relative to S1, at its arrival at S1 it no longer has the frequency f2
relative to an identical clock at S1, but a greater frequency f1, such
that, to a first approximation
>
(2)                  f1 = f2 (1 + gh/c²)
>
******************************************************************************
>
>
>
Since 1911, and for more than 100 years, Eq (2) has remained under the
form  Δf/f₀ = gh/c² or equivalent, before or after the 1917
Schwarzschild-Hilbert solution in GR.
>
1911, Einstein:   Δf/f₀ = gh/c²   (light has mass E/c², asserted
Einstein)
>
1959, Pound-Rebka: Δf/f₀ = gh/c²   (Is Einstein right with light having
mass?)
>
1971, Hafele-Keating:  Δτ/τ₀ = gh/c² (Is Einstein right with GR time
dilation?)
>
2015, Mudrak et. all:  Δf/f₀ = GMₑ/c² [(a - r)/(ar) + J₂/2] ≈ gh/c²  (if
a ≈ r)
>
>
>
>
>
ALL OF THE AB0VE CRAP IS FALSE, AND CAN BE TRACED BACK TO THE 1907-1911
PERIOD, WHEN THE RETARDED TRIED TO INCORPORATE GRAVITY TO SR.
>
BY 1915-1917, THE SCHWARZSCHILS-HILBERT PARTICULAR SOLUTION EMERGED,
WITH A VERY SPECIFIC CONTEXT FOR APPLICABILITY. IN PARTICULAR, THE SUN
WAS MODELED AS A
NON-ROTATING POINT-LIKE MASS, WITH MERCURY AS A MASSLESS TEST PARTICLE.
>
YET, RELATIVISTIC MORONS INSIST ON APPLYING IT TO EVERYTHING ABOVE THE
EARTH'S SURFACE. EITHER MOVING OR STATIC. BECAUSE THEY ARE IMMORAL
SOLD-OUTS, THAT SAW A COW TO BE MILKED TO ITS DEATH, WHILE THEY'RE
PROFITING IN MANY WAYS.
>
THE PSEUDO-SCIENCE OF RELATIVISM IS USED BY PARASITES TO HAVE A NICE AND
UNACCOUNTABLE WAY OF LIVING. THEY ALSO RELY ON AMATEURS FOLLOWERS OF THE
CULT, TO SPREAD THEIR SHIT, TRUSTING IN THEIR BORN IMBECILITY AS
GULLIBLE CRETINS.

>
Actually space-contraction after motion was arrived
at long before that, where what you're looking at
is ten different things mashed into a muddy wad,
and what you're looking at is what _you're_ seeing.

Length contraction was one of the first proposed solutions for saving
the ether from the MMX, and was the first discarded as ad hoc nonsense,
and rightly so.