Re: The HOAX of GR effects in GPS and other artificial satellites,

Extract from the OP:
************************************************************************
In particular, and derived from 110 years old Schwarzchild's solution to
a VERY BASIC PROBLEM, it has been widely spread between relativistic
circles that ANY CLOCK raised to ANY HEIGHT above ground presents a time
or frequency difference (gravitational blue shift, from Schwarzschild
metric) of:
Δf/f = (GMe/c²) (1/R - 1/a) , where R is the Earth's radius and "a" is
the height of the clock above ground.
The above equation came from 1911 Einstein's paper, ratified later in
1915 through GR, that THE GRAVITATIONAL POTENTIAL Φ = -GMe/R affects EM
radiation by a factor Φ/c², increasing its energy (as the clock is
raised) to a value of  Eo (1 + Φ/c²), where Eo is the energy at ground
level.
************************************************************************
Actually, in 1911 Einstein (Point 2. On the Gravitation of Energy)
imagined a "light-generator" above the ground level, sending light
downward with an energy E2. The actual formula (N° 1a) was:
E1 = E2 (1 + Φ/c²), where Φ = -GMe/r; r: distance to the center of
Earth.
He wrote:
*******************************************************
The theory of relativity shows that the inertial mass of a body
increases with the energy it contains; if the increase of energy
amounts to E, the increase in inertial mass is equal to E=c2, where
c denotes the velocity of light. Now, is there an increase
of gravitational mass corresponding to this increase of inertial mass?
If not, then a body would fall in the same gravitational field with
varying acceleration according to the energy it contained. And then
the highly satisfactory result of the theory of relativity, by which
the law of the conservation of mass leads to the law of conservation
of energy, could not be maintained, because it would compel us to
abandon the law of the conservation of mass in its old form for
inertial mass, but maintain it for gravitational mass.
This must be regarded as very improbable.
..............................
HE CONTINUED HIS THOUGHTS
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 first approximation, by the equation:
******************************************************
S2 and S1 are MATERIAL systems located on the z axis of a system K.
S2 system contains the light generator above the origin of z axis in the
system of reference K, which is placed in a homogeneous gravitational
field.
By SR theory PLUS the equivalence principle, he used a system K', which
was placed in a gravity-free environment, but it's moving with constant
acceleration along the positive z axis.
The KEY POINT is what he wrote after the above text:
"At the moment when the radiation energy E2 is emitted from S2 toward
S1, let the velocity of K´ relative to K0 be zero. The radiation will
arrive at S1 when the time h/c has elapsed (to a first approximation).
But at this moment the velocity of S1 relative to K0 is h/c = v.
Therefore
E1 = E2 (1 + v/c) = E2 (1 + Yh/c²)
OR
E1 = E2 (1 + Φ/c²), where Φ = -GMe/r
*********************************************************
From the messy considerations that he wrote in Point 2, it emerges the
idea (accepted by Pound and Rebka EVEN by 1961) that PHOTONS HAD MASS,
and that such (electromagnetic) mass was:
M2 = E2/c²
And that, after falling a distance h with acceleration Y, that mass was
M1 = E1/c²
By 1911, it was accepted that a quanta of energy (later photon)
possessed energy E = hf. It was easy to accept that, due to the formulae
E1 = E2 (1 + Φ/c²) = E2 (1 + Yh/c²)
then
hf1 = hf2 (1 + Φ/c²) = hf2 (1 + Yh/c²)
or, finally (and JUST FOR ONE PHOTON)
f1 = f2 (1 + Φ/c²) = f2 (1 + Yh/c²)
OR THAT
f1 - f2 = Δf = f2 Yh/c² = f2 gh/c²,
which is the widely used formula for gravitational red/blue shifting
Δf/f2 = gh/c² (used by Pound-Rebka, with h = 22.1 meters).
Or, in a more complete form (Mudrak 2017)
Δf/f = (GMe/c²) (1/R - 1/a) ; R: Earth's radius, a: height of satellite.
*****************************************************************
Besides all of the above 100 years old narrative (or fairy tale), there
is ONE QUESTION that emerges:
The above subjects were derived from the original thought of ONE PHOTON
descending on the z axis of the reference.
My question is:
What if AN INCREDIBLE ENERGETIC BEAM OF COHERENT LIGHT took the same
path? Say something like 1,000,000,000 TeraEv?
Would Earth's gravitational field have ANY significant role on this?
Because SR and GR are based mainly in times, lengths and gravity. But it
doesn't work well accounting energy (like the one of the light).
I extend my doubts to the case of light deflection grazing Sun's
surface.
WHAT IF AN INCREDIBLY ENERGETIC LIGHT, FROM A SUPERNOVA EXPLOSION, IS
MEASURED WHEN GRAZING THE SUN'S SURFACE.
Would relativists still consider that it is going to be deflected by
1.75 seconds of an arc?
Assume that the far supernova has a luminosity much greater than Venus,
observed from the Earth.
Questions, doubts, no accountability, narratives, fairy tales,
pseudoscience. That's what relativity is, and much more.