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

[rhertz]

Since 1911, Einstein and relativistic heirs have been rotting physics
with the fairy tale about gravity affecting time shown in any kind of
clocks (mechanical, quartz based and atomic clocks).

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.


In simpler terms, the gravitational potential gained by a raised object
is POTENTIAL ENERGY, which affects
measured time (allegedly) if the object is a clock.


Now, the AWFUL TRUTH that every single blind and deaf relativist CHOOSE
TO IGNORE:

1. EVERY SINGLE SATELLITE IN STABLE ORBIT (MANNED OR NOT) HAS
MICROGRAVITY WITHIN IT, WHICH AFFECTS EVERYTHING INSIDE THE SATELLITE,
EITHER LIVE FORMS OR ARTIFACTS.

2, FOR ANY PRACTICAL CASE, ARTIFACTS LIKE CLOCKS OPERATE AS IF g = ZERO,
DUE TO CENTRIPENTAL FORCES THAT ARE EQUAL TO GRAVITATIONAL FORCES (that
would make them to fall to Earth).

THIS IS PHYSICALLY EQUIVALENT TO THE CASE OF A MIRROR OF EARTH PLACED AT
EQUAL DISTANCE FROM THE CENTER OF EARTH, BUT LOCATED ABOVE OF THE
SATELLITE (R vs. -R, referenced to the satellite).

THEREFORE, THE GRAVITATIONAL POTENTIAL ACTING UPON ANY ONBOARD CLOCK IS
ZERO (MICROGRAVITY).

Due to the above concepts, any onboard clock CAN'T BE AFFECTED BY
GRAVITY, SO SCHWARZCHILD'S SOLUTION IS FALSE WITH RESPECT TO GR EFFECTS.

Only IF such clock would be at the top of a very long pole above the
surface, and not moving at all, using the alleged effects of the
gravitational (potential) energy would be correct in terms of GR.

The only remaining effect for an orbiting satellite, would be the STUPID
TIME DILATION due to its motion.

So, for all of the above, the relativists supporting the crap of
relativity effects on clocks orbiting Earth have to redefine the stupid
theory. Better yet, abandon physics and start a career as gardeners.


As if the above IS NOT ENOUGH, exhaustive experiments done by France
since 2017 SHOWS (with error <10E-15) that THE EQUIVALENCE PRINCIPLE
BREAKS AT QUANTUM LEVEL.

As they wrote here:

https://www.oca.eu/en/news-lagrange/1363-first-results-from-microscope-satellite-confirm-albert-einstein-s-theory-of-relativity-with-unprecedented-precision

QUOTE:

«The satellite’s performance is far exceeding expectations. Data from
more than 1,900 additional orbits are already available and more are to
come, which should enable us to further improve the mission’s
performance and approach its target of acquiring measurements with a
precision of 10-15. This first result is going to shake the world of
physics and will certainly lead to a revision of alternative theories to
general relativity,» said the mission’s principal investigator Pierre
Touboul.

Enjoy slowly, relativists. Please don't choke on your stupidity, as you
are allowed to fail for being just humans.

[Paul.B.Andersen]

Post by rhertz
Since 1911, Einstein and relativistic heirs have been rotting physics
with the fairy tale about gravity affecting time shown in any kind of
clocks (mechanical, quartz based and atomic clocks).
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
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,

You know better, Richard!
Why this obsession with Einstein's 1911 paper?

Post by rhertz
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.

No, THE GRAVITATIONAL POTENTIAL doesn't affect the radiation.
If the emitter and detector are at different heights, both
clocks run at their normal rate.
But the DIFFERENCE in the gravitational potential affects
the receiver's measurements of the radiation.
The gravitational Doppler shift is caused by a relationship
between the clocks.

Like 'normal' Doppler shift is caused by the relative speed
between emitter and source. The clocks in the receiver and
source are both running at their normal rate.
But the DIFFERENCE in the speeds affects the receiver's
measurements
of the radiation.
The Doppler shift is caused by a relationship between the clocks.

Post by rhertz
In simpler terms, the gravitational potential gained by a raised object
is POTENTIAL ENERGY, which affects
measured time (allegedly) if the object is a clock.

No.

Post by rhertz
Now, the AWFUL TRUTH that every single blind and deaf relativist CHOOSE
1. EVERY SINGLE SATELLITE IN STABLE ORBIT (MANNED OR NOT) HAS
MICROGRAVITY WITHIN IT, WHICH AFFECTS EVERYTHING INSIDE THE SATELLITE,
EITHER LIVE FORMS OR ARTIFACTS.
2, FOR ANY PRACTICAL CASE, ARTIFACTS LIKE CLOCKS OPERATE AS IF g = ZERO,
DUE TO CENTRIPENTAL FORCES THAT ARE EQUAL TO GRAVITATIONAL FORCES (that
would make them to fall to Earth).

So physicists CHOOSE TO IGNORE the AWFUL TRUTH that satellites are
in free fall!

Good catch, Richard. :-D

Post by rhertz
THIS IS PHYSICALLY EQUIVALENT TO THE CASE OF A MIRROR OF EARTH PLACED AT
EQUAL DISTANCE FROM THE CENTER OF EARTH, BUT LOCATED ABOVE OF THE
SATELLITE (R vs. -R, referenced to the satellite).

:-D

And the orbit of the satellite would be unaffected by the second Earth?

Post by rhertz
THEREFORE, THE GRAVITATIONAL POTENTIAL ACTING UPON ANY ONBOARD CLOCK IS
ZERO (MICROGRAVITY).

Of course the satellite is unaffected by the gravitational
potential. That's why the clock in the satellite is running at
it's normal rate, a second per second as defined by SI.

According to SR and GR all clocks are always running at their
normal rate.

Didn't you know that, Richard?

Post by rhertz
Due to the above concepts, any onboard clock CAN'T BE AFFECTED BY
GRAVITY,

This is correct.

Post by rhertz
SO SCHWARZCHILD'S SOLUTION IS FALSE WITH RESPECT TO GR EFFECTS.

But this is wrong.
Or rather - it isn't even wrong because the statement is meaningless.

Post by rhertz
Only IF such clock would be at the top of a very long pole above the
surface, and not moving at all, using the alleged effects of the
gravitational (potential) energy would be correct in terms of GR.

So a clock at the top of a 35,796.724 km long pole, would,
like the geostationary satellite it is attached to, be stationary?

Post by rhertz
The only remaining effect for an orbiting satellite, would be the STUPID
TIME DILATION due to its motion.
So, for all of the above, the relativists supporting the crap of
relativity effects on clocks orbiting Earth have to redefine the stupid
theory. Better yet, abandon physics and start a career as gardeners.

Quite.
The stupid physicists believe that the predictions of GR for
the behaviour of clocks in the vicinity of the Earth are
confirmed by these experiments:

https://paulba.no/paper/Hafele_Keating.pdf
https://paulba.no/paper/Alley.pdf
https://paulba.no/paper/Initial_results_of_GPS_satellite_1977.pdf
https://paulba.no/paper/Vessot.pdf

But Richard Hertz knows that all physicists born after 1900 are
members of a MAFFIA, and profit from it. This is because he knows
the different results are COOKED with the help of statistical
manipulations, fraud, cooking and peer complicity.

And Richard Hertz knows the GPS doesn't work because it is
designed according to the false Schwarzschild metric.

Post by rhertz
As if the above IS NOT ENOUGH, exhaustive experiments done by France
since 2017 SHOWS (with error <10E-15) that THE EQUIVALENCE PRINCIPLE
BREAKS AT QUANTUM LEVEL.

WOW! This is so world shattering that it deserves a separate post!

[Paul.B.Andersen]

Post by rhertz
As if the above IS NOT ENOUGH, exhaustive experiments done by France
since 2017 SHOWS (with error <10E-15) that THE EQUIVALENCE PRINCIPLE
BREAKS AT QUANTUM LEVEL.
https://www.oca.eu/en/news-lagrange/1363-first-results-from-microscope-satellite-confirm-albert-einstein-s-theory-of-relativity-with-unprecedented-precision

Didn't you notice the headline which is even in the link above?

"First results from Microscope satellite confirm Albert Einstein’s
theory of relativity with unprecedented precision.

Quote:
"Measurements of the equivalence principle had not been improved
upon for 10 years, but now the first results from CNES’s Microscope
satellite, equipped with accelerometers supplied by the French
aerospace research agency ONERA, are 10 times better. They show,
with an unprecedented precision of 2.E-14, that bodies in a vacuum
fall with the same acceleration. The equivalence principle has so
far proved unshakeable and this result simply reconfirms the theory
of general relativity postulated by Albert Einstein over a century
ago."

Where did you read that
"THE EQUIVALENCE PRINCIPLE BREAKS AT QUANTUM LEVEL"?

Another quote:
"A universal theory unifying gravitation and quantum physics is
therefore the holy grail of physicists in the 21st century.
Certain candidate theories predict that the principle of
the equivalence between gravitation and acceleration, at
the heart of the theory of general relativity, could be violated
at very weak levels. Microscope is pushing this principle to its
limits and yielding new indications to constrain the theory of
general relativity."

Note this!
Certain candidate theories predict that the equivalence principle
could be violated at very weak levels.

These candidate theories are alternative theories to GR.

Post by rhertz
«The satellite’s performance is far exceeding expectations. Data from
more than 1,900 additional orbits are already available and more are to
come, which should enable us to further improve the mission’s
performance and approach its target of acquiring measurements with a
precision of 10-15. This first result is going to shake the world of
physics and will certainly lead to a revision of alternative theories to
general relativity,» said the mission’s principal investigator Pierre
Touboul.

It is the alternative theories which predict that
the equivalence principle could be violated at very weak levels
that have to be revised, not GR.

Because this experiment has shown that the equivalence principle
is NOT violated at very weak levels.


How is it possible to read a text, and believe that it says
the exact opposite of what it says?

You have yet again made a giant fool of yourself, Richard.

Well done! :-D

Post by rhertz
Enjoy slowly, relativists. Please don't choke on your stupidity, as you
are allowed to fail for being just humans.

Did you shoot yourself in the foot, Richard? :-D

[Maciej Wozniak]

Post by Paul.B.Andersen

Post by rhertz
As if the above IS NOT ENOUGH, exhaustive experiments done by France
since 2017 SHOWS (with error <10E-15) that THE EQUIVALENCE PRINCIPLE
BREAKS AT QUANTUM LEVEL.
https://www.oca.eu/en/news-lagrange/1363-first-results-from-
microscope-satellite-confirm-albert-einstein-s-theory-of-relativity-
with-unprecedented-precision

Didn't you notice the headline which is even in the link above?
"First results from Microscope satellite confirm Albert Einstein’s
 theory of relativity with unprecedented precision.
"Measurements of the equivalence principle had not been improved
 upon for 10 years, but now the first results from CNES’s Microscope
 satellite, equipped with accelerometers supplied by the French
 aerospace research agency ONERA, are 10 times better. They show,
 with an unprecedented precision of 2.E-14, that bodies in a vacuum
 fall with the same acceleration. The equivalence principle has so
 far proved unshakeable and this result simply reconfirms the theory
 of general relativity postulated by Albert Einstein over a century
 ago."

And in the meantime in the real world - forbidden by
your idiotic church "improper" clocks keep measuring
improper t'=t in improper seconds.

[Ross Finlayson]

Post by Paul.B.Andersen

Post by rhertz
As if the above IS NOT ENOUGH, exhaustive experiments done by France
since 2017 SHOWS (with error <10E-15) that THE EQUIVALENCE PRINCIPLE
BREAKS AT QUANTUM LEVEL.
https://www.oca.eu/en/news-lagrange/1363-first-results-from-microscope-satellite-confirm-albert-einstein-s-theory-of-relativity-with-unprecedented-precision

Didn't you notice the headline which is even in the link above?
"First results from Microscope satellite confirm Albert Einstein’s
theory of relativity with unprecedented precision.
"Measurements of the equivalence principle had not been improved
upon for 10 years, but now the first results from CNES’s Microscope
satellite, equipped with accelerometers supplied by the French
aerospace research agency ONERA, are 10 times better. They show,
with an unprecedented precision of 2.E-14, that bodies in a vacuum
fall with the same acceleration. The equivalence principle has so
far proved unshakeable and this result simply reconfirms the theory
of general relativity postulated by Albert Einstein over a century
ago."
Where did you read that
"THE EQUIVALENCE PRINCIPLE BREAKS AT QUANTUM LEVEL"?
"A universal theory unifying gravitation and quantum physics is
therefore the holy grail of physicists in the 21st century.
Certain candidate theories predict that the principle of
the equivalence between gravitation and acceleration, at
the heart of the theory of general relativity, could be violated
at very weak levels. Microscope is pushing this principle to its
limits and yielding new indications to constrain the theory of
general relativity."
Note this!
Certain candidate theories predict that the equivalence principle
could be violated at very weak levels.
These candidate theories are alternative theories to GR.

Post by rhertz
«The satellite’s performance is far exceeding expectations. Data from
more than 1,900 additional orbits are already available and more are to
come, which should enable us to further improve the mission’s
performance and approach its target of acquiring measurements with a
precision of 10-15. This first result is going to shake the world of
physics and will certainly lead to a revision of alternative theories to
general relativity,» said the mission’s principal investigator Pierre
Touboul.

It is the alternative theories which predict that
the equivalence principle could be violated at very weak levels
that have to be revised, not GR.
Because this experiment has shown that the equivalence principle
is NOT violated at very weak levels.
How is it possible to read a text, and believe that it says
the exact opposite of what it says?
You have yet again made a giant fool of yourself, Richard.
Well done! :-D

Post by rhertz
Enjoy slowly, relativists. Please don't choke on your stupidity, as you
are allowed to fail for being just humans.

Did you shoot yourself in the foot, Richard? :-D
http://youtu.be/vfONckOPyaI

You know they say the Parker satellite was the fastest-moving thing
while it was exploring its solar station in sort of the same
way as Lense-Thirring was able to make frame-dragging confirm
what's been historically a sort of ether-drift hypothesis which
these days is usually named "aether" to help distinguish that
modern theories after the Equivalence Principle help relate
that it's terrestrial, in effect, as with regards to the
things like "g-forces" and so on.

If perhaps you've read the great paper that came out recently
or within a few years, as it was also discussed here, with
regards to the great survey of experiments validing the
Equivalence Principle, I wrote a criticism of it.

If you think "frame-dragging" and "ether-drift" are so different,
they're not.

I.e., Parker measured the solar system's motion relative
to the surrounds similarly as to how Lense-Thirring did,
Earth's.



The high-energy and low-energy
or for example "Higgs" and "Little Higgs"
help explore that there's a neutrino/muon/hadron
physics emerging as after electron physics.

[ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog]

Post by Paul.B.Andersen
It is the alternative theories which predict that
the equivalence principle could be violated at very weak levels
that have to be revised, not GR.
Because this experiment has shown that the equivalence principle
is NOT violated at very weak levels.

Two paragraphs that I wrote for Wikipedia which are nearly unchanged
from when I first wrote them a decade ago:
"Proposals that may lead to a quantum theory of gravity such as string
theory and loop quantum gravity predict violations of the weak
equivalence principle because they contain many light scalar fields
with long Compton wavelengths, which should generate fifth forces and
variation of the fundamental constants. Heuristic arguments suggest
that the magnitude of these equivalence principle violations could be
in the 10−13 to 10−18 range.
"Currently envisioned tests of the weak equivalence principle are
approaching a degree of sensitivity such that non-discovery of a
violation would be just as profound a result as discovery of a
violation. Non-discovery of equivalence principle violation in this
range would suggest that gravity is so fundamentally different from
other forces as to require a major reevaluation of current attempts to
unify gravity with the other forces of nature. A positive detection,
on the other hand, would provide a major guidepost towards unification."

[Paul.B.Andersen]

Post by ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog

Post by Paul.B.Andersen
It is the alternative theories which predict that
the equivalence principle could be violated at very weak levels
that have to be revised, not GR.
Because this experiment has shown that the equivalence principle
is NOT violated at very weak levels.

Two paragraphs that I wrote for Wikipedia which are nearly unchanged
"Proposals that may lead to a quantum theory of gravity such as string
theory and loop quantum gravity predict violations of the weak
equivalence principle because they contain many light scalar fields
with long Compton wavelengths, which should generate fifth forces and
variation of the fundamental constants. Heuristic arguments suggest
that the magnitude of these equivalence principle violations could be
in the 10−13 to 10−18 range.
"Currently envisioned tests of the weak equivalence principle are
approaching a degree of sensitivity such that non-discovery of a
violation would be just as profound a result as discovery of a
violation. Non-discovery of equivalence principle violation in this
range would suggest that gravity is so fundamentally different from
other forces as to require a major reevaluation of current attempts to
unify gravity with the other forces of nature. A positive detection,
on the other hand, would provide a major guidepost towards unification."

Interesting.

Maybe gravity isn't quantized?

[gharnagel]

Post by ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog
Two paragraphs that I wrote for Wikipedia which are nearly unchanged
"Proposals that may lead to a quantum theory of gravity such as string
theory and loop quantum gravity predict violations of the weak
equivalence principle because they contain many light scalar fields
with long Compton wavelengths, which should generate fifth forces and
variation of the fundamental constants. Heuristic arguments suggest
that the magnitude of these equivalence principle violations could be
in the 10−13 to 10−18 range.
"Currently envisioned tests of the weak equivalence principle are
approaching a degree of sensitivity such that non-discovery of a
violation would be just as profound a result as discovery of a
violation. Non-discovery of equivalence principle violation in this
range would suggest that gravity is so fundamentally different from
other forces as to require a major reevaluation of current attempts to
unify gravity with the other forces of nature. A positive detection,
on the other hand, would provide a major guidepost towards unification."

Well, it looks like 10^-13 to 10^-14 predictions are in very great
doubt. Do you know which theories are predicting violations this big?

[ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog]

Post by gharnagel

Post by ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog
Two paragraphs that I wrote for Wikipedia which are nearly unchanged
"Proposals that may lead to a quantum theory of gravity such as string
theory and loop quantum gravity predict violations of the weak
equivalence principle because they contain many light scalar fields
with long Compton wavelengths, which should generate fifth forces and
variation of the fundamental constants. Heuristic arguments suggest
that the magnitude of these equivalence principle violations could be
in the 10−13 to 10−18 range.
"Currently envisioned tests of the weak equivalence principle are
approaching a degree of sensitivity such that non-discovery of a
violation would be just as profound a result as discovery of a
violation. Non-discovery of equivalence principle violation in this
range would suggest that gravity is so fundamentally different from
other forces as to require a major reevaluation of current attempts to
unify gravity with the other forces of nature. A positive detection,
on the other hand, would provide a major guidepost towards unification."

Well, it looks like 10^-13 to 10^-14 predictions are in very great
doubt. Do you know which theories are predicting violations this big?

See https://hal.science/hal-04105176v1

Few theories have been actually "disproven" by MICROSCOPE results, but
some theories have been constrained to somewhat "unnatural" regions of
parameter space. For instance, in regards to the "runaway dilaton"
model, "...current data already exclude couplings between the runaway
dilaton and the dark sector of order unity, which would be their
natural value."

[Ross Finlayson]

Post by ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog

Post by gharnagel

Post by ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog
Two paragraphs that I wrote for Wikipedia which are nearly unchanged
"Proposals that may lead to a quantum theory of gravity such as string
theory and loop quantum gravity predict violations of the weak
equivalence principle because they contain many light scalar fields
with long Compton wavelengths, which should generate fifth forces and
variation of the fundamental constants. Heuristic arguments suggest
that the magnitude of these equivalence principle violations could be
in the 10−13 to 10−18 range.
"Currently envisioned tests of the weak equivalence principle are
approaching a degree of sensitivity such that non-discovery of a
violation would be just as profound a result as discovery of a
violation. Non-discovery of equivalence principle violation in this
range would suggest that gravity is so fundamentally different from
other forces as to require a major reevaluation of current attempts to
unify gravity with the other forces of nature. A positive detection,
on the other hand, would provide a major guidepost towards unification."

Well, it looks like 10^-13 to 10^-14 predictions are in very great
doubt. Do you know which theories are predicting violations this big?

See https://hal.science/hal-04105176v1
Few theories have been actually "disproven" by MICROSCOPE results, but
some theories have been constrained to somewhat "unnatural" regions of
parameter space. For instance, in regards to the "runaway dilaton"
model, "...current data already exclude couplings between the runaway
dilaton and the dark sector of order unity, which would be their
natural value."

Light speed's units c aren't natural when c_g = infinity,
as with regards to the usual mass/energy equivalency linearly,
as with regards to 1 - v^2/c^2 or a - c^2/v^2, thusly 1 +- c/v,
squared.


Clearly dark matter and dark energy, "unobservable",
are "unscientific".

In their time and place, the theories of
Fatio and LeSage were considered the
premier theories of gravity.

There's Eotvos to consider, though it was Lagrange-point bound
if I recall, while Lense-Thirring and particularly Parker,
have made some tests of the equivalency principle, of
the gravitic and "g-forces", terrestrially and solarly.

Is Eotvos still up there?

[Volney]

Post by rhertz
Since 1911, Einstein and relativistic heirs have been rotting physics
with the fairy tale about gravity affecting time shown in any kind of
clocks (mechanical, quartz based and atomic clocks).
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
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.
In simpler terms, the gravitational potential gained by a raised object
is POTENTIAL ENERGY, which affects
measured time (allegedly) if the object is a clock.
Now, the AWFUL TRUTH that every single blind and deaf relativist CHOOSE
1. EVERY SINGLE SATELLITE IN STABLE ORBIT (MANNED OR NOT) HAS
MICROGRAVITY WITHIN IT, WHICH AFFECTS EVERYTHING INSIDE THE SATELLITE,
EITHER LIVE FORMS OR ARTIFACTS.
2, FOR ANY PRACTICAL CASE, ARTIFACTS LIKE CLOCKS OPERATE AS IF g = ZERO,
DUE TO CENTRIPENTAL FORCES THAT ARE EQUAL TO GRAVITATIONAL FORCES (that
would make them to fall to Earth).
THIS IS PHYSICALLY EQUIVALENT TO THE CASE OF A MIRROR OF EARTH PLACED AT
EQUAL DISTANCE FROM THE CENTER OF EARTH, BUT LOCATED ABOVE OF THE
SATELLITE (R vs. -R, referenced to the satellite).
THEREFORE, THE GRAVITATIONAL POTENTIAL ACTING UPON ANY ONBOARD CLOCK IS
ZERO (MICROGRAVITY).

Obviously, you don't know the difference between gravitational force and
gravitational potential. With a "mirror earth" above the satellite, the
gravitational force would be zero, but the gravitational potential would
be a bit complicated, but still higher at that midpoint than at the
surface of the earth. Without it but with the satellite orbiting, the
net force would be zero but the gravitational potential still higher at
the satellite orbital level than at earth's surface.

You need a new hobby. The physics of relativity just isn't for you. I
don't know if you simply don't understand the physics or whether your
OCD just fucks up your physics abilities when relativity is involved.
I'm quite certain it's the latter.

[Maciej Wozniak]

Post by Volney
Obviously, you don't know the difference between gravitational force and
gravitational potential. With a "mirror earth" above the satellite, the
gravitational force would be zero, but the gravitational potential would
be a bit complicated, but still higher at that midpoint than at the
surface of the earth. Without it but with the satellite orbiting, the
net force would be zero but the gravitational potential still higher at
the satellite orbital level than at earth's surface.
You need a new hobby. The physics of relativity just isn't for you. I
don't know if you simply don't understand the physics or whether your
OCD just fucks up your physics abilities when relativity is involved.
I'm quite certain it's the latter.

Stupid Mike, poor halfbrain, according to the teachings of your moronic
church there is no such thing as "gravitational force". It's just one of
common sense prejudices refuted by your idiot guru.

You need a new hobby. The physics of relativity just isn't for you. I
don't know if you simply don't understand the physics or whether your
OCD just fucks up your physics abilities when relativity is involved.
I'm quite certain it's the latter.

[rhertz]

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.

[Paul.B.Andersen]

And who might that be?

Please:
Quote what you are responding to with attributes! (Who you are quoting)

And please mark the quotes in the way everybody else do!

[J. J. Lodder]

[snip incorrectly quoted material]

Please repost, now correctly quoted,

Jan