Re: Newton: Photon falling from h meters increase its energy.

On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 1:31:59 +0000, rhertz wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jan 2025 20:45:08 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>

rhertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:
>

On Sat, 11 Jan 2025 18:43:41 +0000, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>

W dniu 11.01.2025 o 19:10, rhertz pisze:

On Sat, 11 Jan 2025 17:25:42 +0000, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>

W dniu 11.01.2025 o 18:16, rhertz pisze:

Under Newton, a photon has gravitational mass m, for which it's affected
by gravity.

>
Under which Newton? Do you mean Newton's
optics? It was abandoned in XVIIIth century.

>
Von Soldner's Newton (since 1801)

>
Newton's optics was abandoned, if not in XVIIIth
century than not very long after 1801.

>
And recovered by Einstein in 1911, with a paper WHERE HE MAKE
AFFIRMATIONS about gravitational mass of energy.
>
Ask yourself WHY 1960 Pound-Rebka paper had the title "Apparent weight
of photons" and later, before his death, Pound wrote his memoirs
"Weighting photons".

>
All entirely correct,
-in the Newtonian approximation to general relativity-.
>
As yet we have not yet encountered circumstances in which
the Newtonian approximation is not good enough
to calculate the relativistic red shift,
>
Jan

>
>
>
Then you accept what Einstein affirmed in his 1911 paper: "Energy has
gravitational mass".
>
So much gobbledygook in such old paper just to conceal that he was using
Planck to calculate a shift of gh/c^2 and also m=E/c^2.
>
And 50 years later you had Pound embarrassing himself by using an
eye-catcher title on his paper "Does photons have mass?", just to forget
to expand that title within his 1960 paper! Rebka was only his slave, a
graduate student who depended on Pound to get his PhD in 1961.
>
Shame, scam, crooks, hoax, fraud, etc. This is what relativism is full
of.

"Soldner, Einstein, Gravitational Light Deflection and Factors of Two"
This paper gives an interesting discussion of Soldner's calculation.
And Einstein used a refraction formula to double the deflection=
"photographic plates? Poor did, and he completely repudiated the
findings of Eddington. This should have given pause to any ethical
scientist.
Here are some quotes from Poor's summary: "The mathematical
formula, by which Einstein calculated his deflection of 1.75
seconds for light rays passing the edge of the sun, is a well known
and simple formula of physical optics"; "Not a single one of the
fundamental concepts of varying time, or warped or twisted space,
of simultaneity, or of the relativity of motion is in any way involved
in Einstein's prediction of, or formulas for, the deflection of light";
"The many and elaborate eclipse expeditions have, therefore,
been given a fictitious importance. Their results can neither prove
nor disprove the relativity theory" (emphasis added) (Poor, 1930)." -
saved pdf = "Albert Einsetin, Plagiarist of the Century" p.9