0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

What do you think aboiut all this?

I do understand where you are coming from my friend, but we all need to remember that it's the search that satisfies the scientific spirit. When people are so convinced they can't view things from a different perspective, they have short-changed themselves. But those who keep an open mind are more inclined to recognize the truth when it appears.

The problem was that I even provided a derivation of the fact that the speed of light varies in the presence of gravity, It was ignored. Sheesh!

You seem to be missing the fact that the speed of light, in meters per second, is constant by definition.

That which is defined as a constant can't possibly vary, regardless of gravity. The definitions of meter, second and speed of light are inexorably tied to one another.

If we call the velocity of light at the origin of coordinates c0 then the velocity of light c at a place with the gravitational potential Phi will be given by the relation(3) c = c_{0}(1 + Phi/c^{2})The principle of the constancy of the velocity of light holds good according to this theory in a different form from that which usually underlies the ordinary theory of relativity.

Those definitions are also tied to a particular electromagnetic emission from a cesium atom. The definitions make no distinction about where the cesium atom is. It can be in the middle of a cosmic void or at the event horizon of a black hole; either way its wavelength and frequency in meters and seconds are exactly the same by definition.

The trick to remember is how we defined physics experimentally, what you measure is what you get. Your measurements must define your reality, if you say they don't? Well, then you're a theorist and also looking for something 'hiding' behind the apparent 'screen of reality'.

If from experiment and observation we create our reality and so our models (GR), then in what other way do you wish to explain reality if not by models? Observation, and so our models, suggests something about mass/energy alters spacetime in their vicinity.Can you suggest a way of getting to the fundamental ''truth'' (whatever that means) and how we will know it is the fundamental ''truth'' and not just a very good model?

But those who keep an open mind are more inclined to recognize the truth when it appears.

Pmb, while I can plug-and-chug in the equations, what I find I'm lacking is a physical intuition for curvature vs. flat spacetime vs. the special case of Minkowski spacetime. Can you provide any intuition to the geometry described in the flat spacetime in your example above vs. Minkowski vs. curved space-time? Is it akin to the fact that you can have a curve y=0, which is flat and constant vs. y=x, which is flat and non-constant vs. higher order polynomials which are always curved?