0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

This is a good question. I do note though that Einstein wasn't entirely familiar with the idea of quantum entanglement, and highly disputed its proposition. The idea, Q-E, suggests that light is only ultimately half expressed in a grand consideration of relativity, which would require a halving of calculated arcsec perhaps?

From the moment that Einstein recognized the equivalence between gravity and accelerated frames, he realized that gravity would affect the trajectory of light.

In 1911, he determined that the deflection of a light ray grazing the Sun should be 0.875 arcseconds [4]. In November of 1915, armed with the full theory of general relativity, Einstein realized that the predicted deflection was double his earlier value.

From a modern perspective we understand that there was no flaw or error in his original 1911 derivation. It is equivalent to the deflection that would be calculated using Newtonian theory for a particle moving at the speed of light. This “Newtonian deflection” was first calculated by Henry Cavendish around 1784, and by Johann von Soldner in 1803 [5].

The doubling comes about because the Newtonian deflection must be augmented by the bending of locally straight lines relative to straight lines very far from the Sun, a result of spatial curvature.

The fact that the two effects have the same size is a feature of general relativity; in alternative metric theories of gravity, the Newtonian effect is the same, but the space curvature effect may differ from theory to theory. http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0264-9381/32/12/124001/ampdf

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0264-9381/32/12/124001/ampdf

I recently found an article by Paul Marmet showing that if Einstein’s principle of equivalence is valid then the deflection of light near the Sun must be 0.875 arcsec, not Einstein's 1.75 arcsec. Marmet calculated the 0.875 arcsec of bending in a novel way by considering that it is the massless Sun that is accelerated & that the light travels in a straight line without any gravitational field. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Paul Marmet – Incompatibility between Einstein's general relativity and the principle of equivalence (last checked 17march2017). https://newtonphysics.on.ca/equivalence/index.html Abstract -- This paper reports an analysis of Einstein's principle of equivalence between inertial and gravitational acceleration and its consequences on general relativity. It is shown that the simple application of that principle to photons moving in the Sun's gravitational potential leads to an equation which is not compatible with the one predicting the deflection of light by the Sun. Therefore, the principle of equivalence is not compatible with general relativity.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I agree with much of this. I will have a think & comment later.

"Einstein's Elevator -- is Einstein's equivalence of inertia & gravity logical?"I don't believe so. The argument is that a gravitationally accelerating observer feels no force whereas an observer accelerating under their own power does but that's erroneous in my opinion. A gravitationally accelerated observer feels tidal force - the difference in gravitational strength over the length of the observer. That's exactly what an observer accelerating under their own power feels, if their entire length of the observer (in their direction of motion) were accelerated evenly they would feel no force.