[nilak (OP)]

Why does the energy of a photon increase when falling into a gravitational field ?
Lets suppose we don't know the Einstein Planck equation. If we model this photon as a classical wave of fixed amplitude, a fixed number of oscillations (n) and an initial frequency, if the frequency blueshifts, then in a gravitational field the energy remains constant because the number n cannot increase, neither the amplitude nor the speed. Energy density increases only. This model is a simple oscillation of a single field.( It is a bit different from a mechanical wave because these are made of objects that have mass and can move at various velocities.)

If we use the equation E=hf, then the energy of the photon increases, but I understand that we also need to add the potential energy to find the total energy. Et=Ep+hf. The potential energy decreases by the same amount the hf term increases.

The first problem is, this potential energy is not intrinsic to the photon itself.
Secondly, how can the Einstein-Planck relation for energy (E=hf) be so far from a classical model like I have described?

[GoC]

Because you described it incorrectly.

Why does the energy of a photon increase when falling into a gravitational field ?

It does not have an increase in energy. It is measured in a lower energy position where Space energy is dilated rather than more dense.

 

Lets suppose we don't know the Einstein Planck equation. If we model this photon as a classical wave of fixed amplitude, a fixed number of oscillations (n) and an initial frequency, if the frequency blueshifts, then in a gravitational field the energy remains constant because the number n cannot increase, neither the amplitude nor the speed. Energy density increases only. 

By relativity you have this backwards and illogical. Light does not increase nor decrease in momentum. Just the distance increases for a volume of space energy particles. The increase in distance slows clocks by relativity and can be shown by 7th grade math to follow observations. The detector in a different potential energy is not calibrated to the same length as another potential energy state. So we observe a wave shift between potential energies when there was no shift in the wave itself. There is no momentum shift in the photon.
 

This model is a simple oscillation of a single field.( It is a bit different from a mechanical wave because these are made of objects that have mass and can move at various velocities.) 

It is a mechanical wave of the medium itself. It does its own dilation in the presence of mass because it moves the electrons in mass. Your theory allows electrons to move by magic and not mechanics.
 

If we use the equation E=hf, then the energy of the photon increases, but I understand that we also need to add the potential energy to find the total energy. Et=Ep+hf. The potential energy decreases by the same amount the hf term increases. 

Using the constant speed of light a less dense potential energy state (dilated) the wavelength is created as red shifted compared to a detector in a less dilated potential energy state where the calibration of the instrument is different.

The first problem is, this potential energy is not intrinsic to the photon itself.
Secondly, how can the Einstein-Planck relation for energy (E=hf) be so far from a classical model like I have described?

Most of what you said follows relativity except the dilation of potential energy that you describe as concentrated potential energy which is exactly backwards to dilation of potential energy. Change this and you follow relativity.

Main stream does not follow the postulates of relativity so I suspect most believe no one needs to follow them.  The average of main stream is of lesser a mind than the founders of relativity Einstein and Lorentz. In Einstein's 1920 papers he moved towards the Lorentz interpretation and main stream moved away from Einstein.

A medium cannot have vector motion for relativity to be correct. Spin motion of undetectable size and c spin speed as energy to move electrons
is most likely. Motion itself is a curious state when you actually think about it and not take it for granted as nearly 100% of the population does.

You have a good mind Nilak but relativity is correct. Nothing new but to understand the mechanics. QM is the mechanics of motion.

[nilak (OP)]

Thanks GoC,

Let me answer some of your statements.
The medium doesn't have a vector velocity in my concept and even if it had, it would make no difference because it doesn't use the concept of inertia at all.
The waves in the electromagnetic medium don't move, they propagate. Nothing moves. These wave don't have an identity of their own, just like water waves are made of different molecules as they advance. The difference is the the "molecules" of space don't have inertia like molecules of water. There is no meaning of vector velocity for space.

The motion of electrons is very clear according to my concept. It is the construction that gives them charge that I don't have an answer for. Since electrons are particles with rest mass, my concept says that as log as they travel at subluminal speed, they must posses orbital angular momentum. This OAM is the only thing that slows things down, but the causality within any particle or system is always constant. They propagate the same way as OAM light beams. The only difference is that the twist is much greater which results in lower velocity and they generate a net electric field at the outside of the helical structure.

[GoC]

Thanks GoC,

Let me answer some of your statements.
The medium doesn't have a vector velocity in my concept and even if it had, it would make no difference because it doesn't use the concept of inertia at all.
The waves in the electromagnetic medium don't move, they propagate. Nothing moves. These wave don't have an identity of their own, just like water waves are made of different molecules as they advance. The difference is the the "molecules" of space don't have inertia like molecules of water. There is no meaning of vector velocity for space.

They do create energy transfer so in a sense it is a inertia transfer of a type of spectrum radiation wave.

The motion of electrons is very clear according to my concept. It is the construction that gives them charge that I don't have an answer for. Since electrons are particles with rest mass, my concept says that as log as they travel at subliminal speed, they must posses orbital angular momentum.

I agree with the orbital angular momentum but do not understand the charge issue. You probably cannot have an answer because charge is a potential and not a reason for perpetual motion. Electrons do not rest so rest mass is ambiguous at best. Probably have a angular motion at the constant speed of light. But not a vector speed of light.

This OAM is the only thing that slows things down, but the causality within any particle or system is always constant. They propagate the same way as OAM light beams. The only difference is that the twist is much greater which results in lower velocity and they generate a net electric field at the outside of the helical structure.

I suspect c to be constant even for electrons. Distance for c changes orbital length of cycle rotation. No charge issue for orbital rotation just flow caused by  spacetime energy.

We are not far apart in our views. What you cannot explain as charge  explain as electron flow by the same medium that causes photon propagation. They are different aspects of the same medium.

[nilak (OP)]

The conclusion that the energy of a photon remains constant when descending in a gravity well, was because of some assumption that were probably wrong. This lead to a series of problems. Actually I was distracted by the equation E=hf which would translate to constant amplitude in the classical framework, but it is not a perfect correspondence.
If we increase the frequency and keep energy constant, for a classical wave, the amplitude increases, therefore it is safe to assume that in a gravity well, energy increases.
My current equation shows an increase in amplitude with the increase of energy and frequency is not responsible for the energy increase. This result may be wrong, but I'll assume it is correct and see if it works. The next step is to check if the energy form EM waves comes in lumps or it is only absorbed in quanta and can come in any variable quantity.