• #### Physics Is Dead, Long Live Physics!

From Pentcho Valev@21:1/5 to All on Fri Feb 19 03:56:23 2021
Peter Woit: "...as seems increasingly all too possible, we're now at an endpoint of fundamental physics..." http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=9444

Leonard: "I know I said physics is dead, but it is the opposite of dead. If anything, it is undead, like a zombie." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDNP9KOEdh0

Resurrection is possible (if it's not too late):

(frequency) = (speed of light)/(wavelength)

Einstein's physics: Any frequency shift entails (is caused by) an inversely proportional wavelength shift. Utter nonsense.

Future, Einstein-free physics: Any frequency shift entails (is caused by) a proportional speed-of-light shift.

In other words, the formula

(frequency) = (speed of light)/(wavelength)

tolerates two axioms:

Axiom 1: The speed of light is constant.

Axiom 2: The wavelength of light is constant (for a given emitter).

Axiom 1 killed physics.

Axiom 2 will resurrect it (if it's not too late). Major corollaries:

Corollary 1: Any frequency shift entails (is caused by) a proportional speed-of-light shift.

Corollary 2: If the emitter and the observer (receiver) travel towards each other with relative speed v, the speed of light as measured by the observer is c' = c+v, as per Newton's theory.

Corollary 3: Spacetime and gravitational waves (ripples in spacetime) don't exist. LIGO's "discoveries" are fakes.

Corollary 4: Light falls in a gravitational field with the same acceleration as ordinary falling bodies - near Earth's surface the accelerations of falling photons is g = 9.8 m/s^2. Accordingly, there is no gravitational time dilation - Einstein's
general relativity is nonsense.

Corollary 5: The Hubble redshift is due to light slowing down as it travels through vacuum. The universe is static, not expanding.

Pentcho Valev

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Pentcho Valev@21:1/5 to All on Fri Feb 19 06:53:31 2021
The texts below unwittingly lay the foundation of future, Einstein-free physics. Speed and frequency of light vary proportionally, wavelength (speed/frequency) is constant, in accordance with the formula

(frequency) = (speed of light)/(wavelength)

This constancy of the wavelength of light, generalized over all possible scenarios (both in presence and in absence of gravity), will become the fundamental axiom of the new physics:

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign: "Consider a falling object. ITS SPEED INCREASES AS IT IS FALLING. Hence, if we were to associate a frequency with that object the frequency should increase accordingly as it falls to earth. Because of the
equivalence between gravitational and inertial mass, WE SHOULD OBSERVE THE SAME EFFECT FOR LIGHT. So lets shine a light beam from the top of a very tall building. If we can measure the frequency shift as the light beam descends the building, we should be
able to discern how gravity affects a falling light beam. This was done by Pound and Rebka in 1960. They shone a light from the top of the Jefferson tower at Harvard and measured the frequency shift. The frequency shift was tiny but in agreement with the
theoretical prediction. Consider a light beam that is travelling away from a gravitational field. Its frequency should shift to lower values. This is known as the gravitational red shift of light." https://courses.physics.illinois.edu/phys419/sp2011/
lectures/Lecture13/L13r.html

Albert Einstein Institute: "One of the three classical tests for general relativity is the gravitational redshift of light or other forms of electromagnetic radiation. However, in contrast to the other two tests - the gravitational deflection of light
and the relativistic perihelion shift -, you do not need general relativity to derive the correct prediction for the gravitational redshift. A combination of Newtonian gravity, a particle theory of light, and the weak equivalence principle (gravitating
mass equals inertial mass) suffices. [...] The gravitational redshift was first measured on earth in 1960-65 by Pound, Rebka, and Snider at Harvard University..." http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/redshift_white_dwarfs.html

"To see why a deflection of light would be expected, consider Figure 2-17, which shows a beam of light entering an accelerating compartment. Successive positions of the compartment are shown at equal time intervals. Because the compartment is
accelerating, the distance it moves in each time interval increases with time. The path of the beam of light, as observed from inside the compartment, is therefore a parabola. But according to the equivalence principle, there is no way to distinguish
between an accelerating compartment and one with uniform velocity in a uniform gravitational field. We conclude, therefore, that A BEAM OF LIGHT WILL ACCELERATE IN A GRAVITATIONAL FIELD AS DO OBJECTS WITH REST MASS. For example, near the surface of Earth
light will fall with acceleration 9.8 m/s^2." http://web.pdx.edu/~pmoeck/books/Tipler_Llewellyn.pdf

Pentcho Valev

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Pentcho Valev@21:1/5 to All on Fri Feb 19 08:20:31 2021
Einstein's 1905 constant-speed-of-light nonsense entails another nonsense: the wavelength of light varies with the speed of the emitter, as is the case for sound waves or light waves in an ether: