0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
My theory of an additional inverted time dilation is based on the concept that when we measure time via the caesium atom in a gravitational gradient, that we are only measuring what time is doing for the caesium atom,
Frequency is a time integral.
We can cause man made light to shift frequency in a non changing gravitational field by adding or subtracting energy via temperature or charge.
I was just beginning to wonder where you were, and here you are!
Quote from: timey on 14/05/2016 22:53:03We can cause man made light to shift frequency in a non changing gravitational field by adding or subtracting energy via temperature or charge. Have I missed something here? You can't add temperature or charge to a photon, surely?
Clearly the black body experiment adds temperature and produces photons of varying energy, frequency and wavelength.Switch on a torch with enough battery 'charge' and the tungsten filament or LED glows when electricity flows through it, thus producing visible light.
redshifted light is not indicative of light sources expanding away from us in the way currently thought.
But what makes the time dilate? All we know about distant galaxies is that they are distant. We infer that they are moving away from us because their spectra are Doppler redshifted. If you want to say that the redshift is actually due to a gravitaional effect, you need to postulate an external source of gravitation, or state that all distant galaxies are very dense (just possible) and their density increases with distance (most improbable).
Over time the central black holes of distant galaxies will consume some of the total mass of the galaxy over time. Since looking out to these galaxies means looking back in time then it is entirely possible that galaxy density does indeed increase with distance. Since as we view objects farther away less time has passed since the big bang.
Too many pseudoscientific words in a meaningless jumble! Have another go, perhaps before the pubs open.
GR states that... ""The gravitational gradient alters the frequency of the travelling photon - as you well know."" ... because it has a relativistic mass associated with its energy that is affected by gravity potential,ie: the strength of the gravitational field of its location. no, it's because a gravitational field is equivalent to an accelerating frame of referenceInverted time theory does not attribute light with having mass, only energy.good, because that is true""Alters the frequency of" does not mean "has a frequency".""A gravitational field has energy. Simply view the energy of gravity as the non zero energy of space. Where there is more gravity there is more energy. Energy is inherent with a frequency.nonsense. do your dimensinal analysis and you'll see why.""And don't bother with the phrase "static distance of gradient". The PR experiment measured gravitational shift by comparing it with a Doppler shift.""And it was proved that there is the motion of a Doppler shift within the gravitational shift over a static distance.A meaningless jumble of words. PR proved that you can measure G shift with D shift.""That's all. If you keep it simple, you won't confuse yourself with unnecessary jargon.""I'm not being confused by any jargon. I read respected physics books by respected physics authors, and I read articles and wiki links. Then I simply repeat what I've read. Obviously not. Please show me where you read "there is the motion of a Doppler shift within the gravitational shift over a static distance", for instance. That's all!Maths on the other hand do confuse me, and again and again, I stress that help with maths is my reason for being here. Stated in my first post ever, and many times since.This is a forum board of New Theories, and ITT is a new theory. It stands to reason that any new idea is going to be taking a novel approach or novel view on aspects of accepted physics.Agreed, but it helps if you dopn't misquote the old physics, or reinvent it.Unlike any other New Theory on this board Alan, this one does not seek to introduce or incorporate any unobserved inclusions to accepted physics, as indeed accepted physics does itself. ITT only seeks to view any actual observed accepted physics from a slightly different perspective.You have said ""The PR experiment measured gravitational shift by comparing it with a Doppler shift.""The experiment shows us what is causing the motion of a Doppler shift in the test signal. What is causing the motion of a Doppler shift in the gravitational shift measured? Doppler shift is not gravitational shift. Please mind your language!
""no, it's because a gravitational field is equivalent to an accelerating frame of reference""Yes, precisely... and an accelerating frame of reference (GR), and a gravitational field increasing the rate of time (ITT), can be viewed as being equivalent. (the benefits of doing so result in a cyclic universe)Alan, I really do not understand why you find it so difficult to grasp this simple concept:If you are using a Doppler shift to measure a phenomenon, then the phenomenon you are measuring will be inherent with the properties of the measuring unit.How can the gravitational shift match, ie: 'harmonise with' the created Doppler shift if it were otherwise?
The man made Doppler shift in the Pound Rebka was 'not' a change in photon frequency at-all, Alan. They created the man made Doppler shift of the emitted gamma ray in relation to the receiving atom, to cancel out the gravitational shift of the gamma ray
The Doppler shift in the Pound Rebka is No. It isn't the vibration. It is caused by the vibration which at some point gave the emitter or detector a velocity such that the Doppler shift matched the gravitational shift.the man made speaker vibration of the emitted light source in relation to the motion of the receiving atom.The gravitational shift is the change in the gravitational field gradient.NJo, it is caused by the difference in gravitational potential between the emitter and the receiver.The Pound Rebka proved that the gravitational shift of the gravitational field has a frequency that can be harmonised with, and be cancelled out by a man made Doppler shift, (which was not a change in the frequency of a photon), created by speaker vibration and the motion of the receiving atom. PoppycockWhy would someone call a change in the gravitational gradient, ie: gravitational shift, a change in photon energy? Nobody does. Just stick to the words on the card, and don't try to add more. The gravitational shift causes a change in photon energy,no, it is a change in photon energy, caused by gravitational potential difference and in the case of any other particle with mass's energy, the gravitational shift causes a contrary (but not directly opposite) change in energy than it does with the photon,If this means anything, can you prove or explain it? but you cannot describe these energy changes in the photon or any other particle as the gravitational shift itself. The gravitational shift is the changes in the gravitational field, surely?No, it is the shift if photon frequency caused by the change in gravitational potentialEdit: ...and in reply to your edit: where does this v exist in the gravitational field within a static distance? It is the relative velocity of source and receiver - i.e. the determinant of Doppler shift. Nothing to do with gravitation.
velocity of Doppler shift
I repeat, it was the gravitational field, being measured.
whatever it is about gravitational potential that causes light to shift in energy and frequency has been cancelled out by this determinant of Doppler shift.
Does the vibration of the speaker, or the relative motion of the receiving atom, affect the energy and frequency of the gamma ray? No it doesn't.
Pound and Rebka countered the gravitational blueshift by moving the emitter away from the receiver, thus generating a relativistic Doppler redshift
Yes we can see that the determinate of the Doppler shift is a measure of what the gravitational shift of the gamma ray would have been, had it shifted energy and frequency.
But again I ask you, 'what' in the gravitational shift was 'cancelled out' in order for the gamma ray's energy and frequency 'not' to be shifted in the gravitational gradient?
**sigh** That timey eh? If you have to explain once you have to explain a Million times! Brain not in gear girl?
Quote from: timey on Today at 22:05:37Yes we can see that the determinate of the Doppler shift is a measure of what the gravitational shift of the gamma ray would have been, had it shifted energy and frequency.Now look at the physics. The frequency did indeed shift, exactly as predicted......
QuoteBut again I ask you, 'what' in the gravitational shift was 'cancelled out' in order for the gamma ray's energy and frequency 'not' to be shifted in the gravitational gradient?.....then they added a Doppler shift of equal and opposite magnitude, so that the received frequency was the same as the emitted frequency. What's the problem?
And what is causing the photon to G-shift?
In astrophysics, gravitational redshift or Einstein shift is the process by which electromagnetic radiation originating from a source that is in a gravitational field is reduced in frequency, or redshifted, when observed in a region of a weaker gravitational field. This is a direct result of gravitational time dilation - as one moves away from a source of gravitational field, the rate at which time passes is increased relative to the case when one is near the source. As frequency is inverse of time (specifically, time required for completing one wave oscillation), frequency of the electromagnetic radiation is reduced in an area of a lower gravitational field.
My theory says that the extra relative motion that the Pound Rebka measured as the G shift via the Doppler shift is caused by the photon moving through a slower rate of time in the weaker gravitational field.
As I understand it, the Doppler shift measurement is a plus for a redshift and a minus for a blueshift. A plus will constitute a reduced frequency and a minus will constitute an increased frequency.A frequency is ascertained via a time integral,I have explained previously that this is not true ie: waves per 'second'. The time integral used is the 'standard second' that also contains within its structure, the constants of the speed of light,no it doesn't and the distance of 299 792 458 meters.not true either
By dividing the constants of the mathematical structure of the means of ascertaining frequency as though it were the time, distance, velocity formula, using the constant of 299 792 458 meters as d, the speed of light c standing in for t, and the measure of the frequency, (being the only variable), instead of v:d/fc=t~ whereby t~ will be a longer second than our standard second.
Yes, you 'could' say that the caesium atom blue shifts when moving into a weaker gravitational field, and that every particle with mass will do so.
A photon does the opposite, it red-shifts into a weaker gravitational field.
The standard second is what we use to measure everything in physics. It is used to measure the speed of light
The speed of light in vacuum, commonly denoted c, is a universal physical constant important in many areas of physics. Its precise value is 299792458 metres per second (approximately 3.00×108 m/s), since the length of the metre is defined from this constant and the international standard for time.
If you think for one minute that the 30 or so theoretical physics books that I have read over the last 8 years haven't covered all of that then you haven't read many theoretical physics books.
I am looking at the possibility that because the photon has no mass that this reduction in frequency in a weaker gravitational field can be indicative of an additional phenomenon of an inverted time dilation, whereby the extra length in wavelength of shifted light is 'inverted time dilation' related, ie: it takes the light a longer 'time' to cover same distance, and the extra length of wavelength is then not an extra length in actual distance.
Quote from: timey on 21/05/2016 17:51:30Yes, you 'could' say that the caesium atom blue shifts when moving into a weaker gravitational field, and that every particle with mass will do so.but I didn't, because it isn't true and is wholly irrelevant. The cesium atom doesn't move.
QuoteA photon does the opposite, it red-shifts into a weaker gravitational field. And there's the source of your confusion.[/qoute]I have no confusion.Quote from: alancalverd on 21/05/2016 19:45:10Time slows down in a stronger gravitational field. Therefore a photon travelling towards a stronger field will appear to the observer to be blue-shifted, and a photon travelling towards a weaker field will appear to an observer in the weaker field to be red-shfted.Why is your light clock's frequency's direction of increase and decrease in a gravitational field the opposite of your caesium clocks direction of frequency when exposed to changes in the gravitational field?Quote The standard second is what we use to measure everything in physics. It is used to measure the speed of light both irrelvant and untrue! Back to Wikipedia:Quote The speed of light in vacuum, commonly denoted c, is a universal physical constant important in many areas of physics. Its precise value is 299792458 metres per second (approximately 3.00×108 m/s), since the length of the metre is defined from this constant and the international standard for time. What can I say? I repeat, anything that measures per second, holds a second constant. I can see the possibility of using other constants related to a second, ie: the speed of light, and via the speed of light, 299 792 458 meters of distance, as a substructure in relation to frequency, joules, ev, when calculating gravity and light. I'm sorry you can't see it.QuoteIf you think for one minute that the 30 or so theoretical physics books that I have read over the last 8 years haven't covered all of that then you haven't read many theoretical physics books. But why haven't you learned the most basic aspects of relativity from them?
Time slows down in a stronger gravitational field. Therefore a photon travelling towards a stronger field will appear to the observer to be blue-shifted, and a photon travelling towards a weaker field will appear to an observer in the weaker field to be red-shfted.