Re: In 1911, EInstein thought that photons had mass. Still in use 123 years after,

************************************************************************
On 2024-09-14 03:31:43 +0000, rhertz said:

This is an extract from the 1911 paper:
On the Inuence of Gravitation on the Propagation of Light

After 1911 much has been found out about gravitation and photons.
Better ways to present what was already known have also been developed.
--
Mikko
***********************************************************************
Actually, those "Better ways to present what was already known have also
been developed." are ALL THE SAME, expressed in similar but equivalent
ways to the 1911 Postulate. Examples:
1) Any electromagnetic beam directed from any height towards the Earth's
ground GAINS ENERGY (blue-shifting) in the proportion:
ΔE/E = Φ/c² =  GMe/c² (1/Re - 1/Rs)
2) The satellite clock is PERCEIVED to be ticking slower (from the
Earth's ground) by a factor:
Δf/f = Φ/c² =  GMe/c² (1/Re - 1/Rs)
with respect to a TWIN CLOCK, located on the Earth's surface.
At ANY CASE, there IS NO experimental proof about any of these two
cases, because the relativity of the pseudoscience that relativity is,
prevents THAT ANY LOCAL MEASURE ONBOARD can be remotely measured from
ANY ground station.
In the case of orbiting clocks, the theoretical accumulative difference
in TIME ELAPSED is questionable IF such clocks are sent back to the
ground lab for comparisons, because it violates the purity of the theory
in this way: Relativity formulae are ANALOG, while data stored in
orbiting clocks is DIGITAL.
Digital technology was unknown 100 years ago (even 70 years ago). There
is NO mathematical explanation about what happens when you TRANSFORM
analog information of EM radiation into digital info (A.K.A digital
counters of BOTH CLOCKS.
If you want a VALID PROOF, put a GIANT DIGITAL DISPLAY on board, which
could be seen from Earth with a telescope. Then, using a telescope and
discounting the time EM energy takes to reach ground, you CAN CERTAINLY
compare both clocks or both frequencies (from orbiting satellite and
from ground lab).
Such experiment would ELIMINATE the uncertainty of PERCEPTION, isn't it?
But this IS NOT CONVENIENT, so nothing like this has been attempted.
Another way would be to ENCODE the digital data of any given satellite,
and DOWNLOAD IT to the lab (much simpler).
WHY THIS IS NOT DONE OR PUBLISHED (if it's being done in the last 50
years)?
MYSTERY. The fairy tale of relativity has to be protected by all means
within relativistic circles.