Re: Pseudoscience III: Each SR/GR experiment is a FRAUD!

On Thu, 26 Sep 2024 13:41:37 +0000, ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog wrote:

On Thu, 26 Sep 2024 1:14:54 +0000, rhertz wrote:
>

If you want, we could RE-DISCUSS another HOAX: 1961 Pound-Rebka, or any
other "classic proof" of relativity of your choice.

>
I won't waste time arguing with you, but I will merely refer you to
this article in Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound%E2%80%93Rebka_experiment
>
In additional to 86% text authorship, I was responsible for the SVG
diagram and the animations.
>

I mean "classic" by "historical", not the modern crap, which is much
worse and authored by 10-15-20 imbeciles fraudsters.

>
Modern measurements greatly tighten the error bars.
>
At some level of measurement precision, it is expected that the
equivalence principle must eventually break down. So far it hasn't.
>
Gravitational redshift measurements provide a direct measure of
local position invariance, one of the three hypotheses underlying
the equivalence principle.

I really don't understand why you should be against Pound-Rebka.
Although gravitational redshift was one of the classical tests of
general relativity, it is now universally recognized that ANY theory
of gravitation that respects the equivalence principle will predict
gravitational redshift. THIS INCLUDES NEWTONIAN GRAVITATION.
Just because Einstein predicted gravitational redshift does not mean
that it is wrong or doesn't exist.