THEORY OF GRAVITY

The ATLAS particle detector at the Large Hadron Collider

The standard model does not include an explanation of gravity, which most scientists believe is best described by general relativity theory. This theory claims that gravity is not a force that propagates across space but results from masses distorting the ‘fabric of spacetime’ in their vicinity in some mysterious way. Since ‘curved spacetime’ is a geometrical abstraction, relativity theory is merely a mathematical model and does not provide a realistic understanding of gravity.(The Farce of Modern Physic)

The Dynamic Theory of Gravity of Nikola Tesla explains the relation between gravitation and electromagnetic force as a unified field theory (a model over matter, the aether, and energy). It is a unified field theory to unify all the fundamental forces (such as the force between all masses) and particle responses into a single theoretical framework.

Introduction

Tesla's proposition that gravity is a field effect is being given more serious consideration by researchers. At the time of his announcement, his critique on Einstein's work was considered by the scientific establishment to exceed the bounds of reason. While this theory is disputed by some or simply ignored by others, it does not change the clear indication of the resurfacing of many supposedly "new" ether based theories by current scientists. Initially developed between 1892 and 1894 during the period in which he was conducting experiments with high frequency and high potential currents and electromagnetism, it was subsequently never officially published. Though these principles guided his future research and experiments, Tesla did not announce his theory until near the end of his life after he had been disillusioned by the war efforts. The Dynamic Theory of Gravity neither appears nor is mentioned anywhere in standard Tesla informative sites and reportedly, is still classified and unavailable under the FOIA.

Dynamic theory of gravity

Tesla published a prepared statement on his 81st birthday (July 10, 1937) critiquing Albert Einstein's theory of relativity. The following is a portion of that statement:

"... Supposing that the bodies act upon the surrounding space causing curving of the same, it appears to my simple mind that the curved spaces must react on the bodies, and producing the opposite effects, straightening out the curves. Since action and reaction are coexistent, it follows that the supposed curvature of space is entirely impossible - But even if it existed it would not explain the motions of the bodies as observed. Only the existence of a field of force can account for the motions of the bodies as observed, and its assumption dispenses with space curvature. All literature on this subject is futile and destined to oblivion. So are all attempts to explain the workings of the universe without recognizing the existence of the ether and the indispensable function it plays in the phenomena."

"My second discovery was of a physical truth of the greatest importance. As I have searched the entire scientific records in more than a half dozen languages for a long time without finding the least anticipation, I consider myself the original discoverer of this truth, which can be expressed by the statement: There is no energy in matter other than that received from the environment." — Nikola Tesla

While this statement asserted that Tesla had "worked out a dynamic theory of gravity" that he soon hoped to give to the world, he reportedly died before he publicized the details. There is still a halo of mystery around his death - even the exact date is not certain. It is speculated that his death may have been caused by too much "pressure" by agents in order to extract and obtain the secret documents regarding this theory.

Unfortunately few details were publicly revealed by Tesla about his theory. Available details argument against space being curved by gravitational effects, which leads some to believe Tesla failed to understand Einstein's theory is not about curved space at all, but curved space-time. However, there is disagreement about Tesla's exact understanding of Einstein's theories; Tesla was actively conducting tangible experiments during the time of Einstein's theoretical research. He underlined that time was a mere man-made reference used for convenience and as such the idea of a "curved space-time" was delusional, hence there was no basis for the Relativistic "space-time" binomium concept.

Tesla's aether concept

It is important to correctly comprehend Tesla's unique aether concept as several popular researchers in the field have not done. Tesla's aether is analogous to the classical aether "gas" theory.

"Long ago he recognized that all perceptible matter comes from a primary substance, or tenuity beyond conception, filling all space, the Akasha or luminiferous ether, acted upon by the life giving Prana or creative force, calling into existence, in never ending cycles all things and phenomena. The primary substance, thrown into infinitesimal whirls of prodigious velocity, becomes gross matter; the force subsiding, the motion ceases and matter disappears, reverting to the primary substance." (Grotz, 1997)

Tesla's aether is a rarefied gas having extreme elasticity. It allows ponderable matter to pass almost freely through it, waves in it are electromagnetic waves and electrostatic, gravitational and magnetic forces are all directly related to the aether. It is important to note that there are major errors in the works of several major Tesla researchers, they have incorrectly deduced from Tesla's pre-1900 lectures on alternate currents of high potential that Tesla said his aether could be "polarized" and made "rigid" through a particular high frequency alternator and single terminal coil (ex. 1892 lecture in London) and 2 metal plates which he "suspended" in the air making the space between them rigid "privately" on one another (ed. the Tesla Effect). 

Tesla believed his aether to be an insulating medium and after studying the lectures in detail it becomes apparent that he is in fact talking about polarizing and solidifying the air, not the aether. Also his aether is said to be carriers immersed in an insulating medium as supposedly quoted from one of his high frequency lectures. This is incorrect as reading it properly it states that the air is the carriers and the insulating medium is the aether. In 1894, Tesla invented a special bulb (which was the ultimate result of his research in vacuum tubes; the unipolar "targetless" bulb) which augmented this technology to create "tubes of force" which could be used for motive power (what Tesla later cited as "veritable ropes of air"). Note that the tubes of force is only a theory and without proof should not be taken seriously.

Tesla's Theory of Gravity

WHAT IS GRAVITY ? 

The Force Due To The Effects Of Well Balanced Universe

Nicola Tesla was right, Einstein was wrong.There are no such things as curved/warped space. Space-time just a mathematical model.There are no gravitational waves or ripples in space-time. Where does energy for gravitational waves come from? Gravitational waves don’t carry any energy, so they’re just a formal mathematical construct with no real physical meaning (Nathan Rosen, 1955). Gravity is a real force, there are exist gravity waves, not gravitational waves.

In the Earth's atmosphere, gravity waves are a mechanism for the transfer of momentum from the troposphere to the stratosphere. Gravity waves are generated in the troposphere by frontal systems or by airflow over mountains. At first, waves propagate through the atmosphere without appreciable change in mean velocity. But as the waves reach more rarefied (thin) air at higher altitudes, their amplitude increases, and nonlinear effects cause the waves to break, transferring their momentum to the mean flow.This process plays a key role in studying the dynamics of the middle atmosphere. The clouds in gravity waves can look like altostratus undulatus clouds.(wikipedia)

Cirrus and Altostratus undulatus clouds

Undulated cloud in Christchurch, New Zealand. 


Albert Einstein was one of the greatest physicist.Therefore, it is hard to understand he made a mistake in his thought experiments-equivalence principle-moreover in his proving method to prove his hypothesis.In fact, we found something new. 
Did you know, Einstein's thought experiments are incomprehensive,illogical, and misleading? The equivalence principle is false, and Einstein's proving method for his hypothesis 'deflection of light by the Sun' isn't scientific and deeply wrong? Unfortunately, a revelation of universal law 'the velocity of light is constant' and gravitational redshifts also incorrect......The Evidence 2016, should we reshaped the modern physics?

Kindle eBook: The Evidence 2016

 

 

THE SOUND OF HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF .....

 caglecom

From Einstein’s Theory to Gravity’s Chirp

The path from a revolutionary set of equations to the detection of gravitational waves was strewn with obstacles and controversy, explains the physicist Daniel Kennefick — and the struggle continues.

“There are no gravitational waves … ” … “Plane gravitational waves, traveling along the positive X-axis, can therefore be found … ” … “ … gravitational waves do not exist … ” … “Do gravitational waves exist?” … “It turns out that rigorous solutions exist … ”

These are the words of Albert Einstein. For 20 years he equivocated about gravitational waves, unsure whether these undulations in the fabric of space and time were predicted or ruled out by his revolutionary 1915 theory of general relativity. For all the theory’s conceptual elegance — it revealed gravity to be the effect of curves in “space-time” — its mathematics was enormously complex.

The question was settled once and for all last week, when scientists at the Advanced Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (Advanced LIGO) reported that they had detected gravitational waves emanating from the violent merger of two black holes more than one billion light-years away. Picking up the signal — a tiny flurry of contractions and expansions in space-time called a “chirp” — required extraordinary technical finesse. But it also took 100 years for scientists to determine what, exactly, Einstein’s theory predicts: not only that gravitational waves exist, but how they look after crossing the cosmos from a coalescing pair of black holes — inescapably steep sinkholes in space-time whose existence Einstein found even harder to swallow.

Daniel Kennefick, a theoretical physicist at the University of Arkansas, began his career as a graduate student working with LIGO co-founder Kip Thorne to unravel the predictions of general relativity. Fascinated by the contentious history of gravitational-wave research, Kennefick began a sideline as a historian; he is the author of the 2007 book Traveling at the Speed of Thought: Einstein and the Quest for Gravitational Waves, and last year he co-authored An Einstein Encyclopedia. In discussions before and after Thursday’s big announcement, Kennefick recounted the journey leading up to it and explained where theorists must go from here. An edited and condensed version of the conversation follows.

QUANTA MAGAZINE: How exciting was last Thursday’s announcement for you?

Courtesy of Daniel Kennefick

Daniel Kennefick, a theoretical physicist and Einstein scholar at the University of Arkansas.

DANIEL KENNEFICK: I couldn’t believe how exciting it was. It’s great, given the very controversial history of the field, that it’s such an incontrovertible detection. They didn’t have to dig the signal out of the noise as many of us expected they would; you could really see it in the data with your own eyes. And from a theorist’s point of view, one is thrilled that the theoretical predictions were so close to reality. There was the signal, and there was their prediction of what the waveform from the merger of two black holes would look like overlying it.

How would you characterize the history of gravitational-wave research that led up to this moment?

There’s no doubt that a big characteristic has been controversy — a series of controversies. Controversy over whether gravitational waves exist. Do they really exist? Do they carry energy? Do they exist in a way that we can hope to detect? Even just ontologically: What is reality? Are you measuring something here or are you kidding yourselves?

And that’s been true from the very beginning. The first mention of gravitational waves that we have from Einstein is of him saying they don’t exist. Gravitational waves were a very bold, daring idea that started to enter people’s heads 100 years ago, and yet there’s always been that sense of uncertainty. One question will be answered but a new question will come up.

How does the phrase in your book title — “traveling at the speed of thought” — capture this uncertainty?

When Einstein wrote his paper [predicting gravitational waves] in 1916, he thought he had discovered three different kinds of gravitational waves. Earlier that year, when he thought the waves didn’t exist, he had been using the wrong coordinate system. He changed to a different coordinate system at the suggestion of a colleague, and that allowed him to see more clearly that there were waves. But this coordinate system is itself kind of wavy, and so it turned out that two of the waves he thought he was looking at were really just flat space seen in a wavy coordinate system; they’re not real waves at all.

[The English astronomer and physicist] Arthur Stanley Eddington responded to Einstein’s paper in 1922, and he was interested in the question: Do gravitational waves travel at the speed of light? The answer is that they do, as we now know for sure. Eddington did his calculation to show that, and he realized that the two other types of waves, the spurious ones, could travel at any speed depending on what coordinate system you use, and so he said these fake waves “travel at the speed of thought.” It’s a charming phrase because on the one hand it shows the skepticism — “traveling at the speed of thought” as something that’s not real. And on the other hand it shows the importance of skepticism, because after all, there aren’t three types of gravitational waves; there’s only one kind.

And then Einstein changed his mind again in 1936 and said gravitational waves don’t exist. What happened?

Einstein and his assistant Nathan Rosen set out to find an exact [rather than approximate] gravitational-wave solution, and they discovered a problem. No matter how they tried to set up their coordinate system, they always found a “singularity” somewhere in space-time. A singularity means a place where we can’t assign a number to how big the wave is there. Now the truth is, this singularity was only a coordinate singularity; it’s not a real problem with gravitational waves.

Think about the North Pole. If I ask you what is the longitude of the North Pole, you’ll say, “Well, all lines of longitude run through the North Pole.” Our system of measurement breaks down there, but that doesn’t mean the North Pole doesn’t exist or you can’t go there. Physically, it exists. So Einstein and Rosen were confused. They thought that since there was a singularity there, this provided a proof that gravitational waves couldn’t exist. So they wrote this paper and they sent it off to the Physical Review. And the referee wrote a 10-page report pointing out the possibility of a mistake, and that was sent back to Einstein. He reacted very angrily and just withdrew the paper.

And some people started arguing that even if gravitational waves did exist, it wouldn’t be possible to feel them.

In 1955, Nathan Rosen tried to argue that gravitational waves don’t carry any energy, so they’re just a formal mathematical construct with no real physical meaning. A good way to think about that is, if I’m out in the ocean and there’s an enormous ocean swell, I might not even be aware that it’s there, because I’ll rise up with the wave and then sink back down with it, and so will everything around me. If gravitational waves are like that deep ocean swell, do they really interact with us or do we all just move together up and down in the swell? That was a big debate in the ’50s.

How did that question get resolved?

Rosen’s argument was brought up at a conference in 1957 in Chapel Hill, N.C., and very fortunately a man named Felix Pirani, who sadly just passed away, came to the conference. He had decided to look at how general relativity works, using a very practical approach that got around this whole problem of the coordinate system, and he showed that the waves would move particles back and forth as they pass by.

Richard Feynman heard Pirani’s talk and said, in essence, “Well, since we know that the particles move, all we have to do is imagine a stick, and on the stick we can put some beads. As the wave passes by, the beads will move back and forth, but the stick will stay rigid because the electromagnetic forces in the stick will try to keep the atoms and electrons in the same positions as they were previously. So the beads will drag against the stick, and the friction will produce energy. And the energy must have come from the gravitational wave. So I conclude that the wave has energy.” So this famous “sticky bead” thought experiment convinced a lot of people that there wasn’t any reason for the skepticism that Rosen had advanced. And then people like Joe Weber started trying to detect gravitational waves shortly after.

But people still didn’t know whether there would be any astrophysical sources of gravitational waves strong enough to detect, right?

Right. Einstein wrote that it was unlikely that anyone would ever find a system whose behavior would be measurably influenced by gravitational waves. He was pointing out that the waves from a typical binary star system would carry away so little energy, we would never even notice that the system had changed — and that is true. The reason we can see it from the two black holes is that they are closer together than two stars could ever be. The black holes are so tiny and yet so massive that they can be close enough together to move around each other very, very rapidly. Since Einstein didn’t believe in the existence of black holes, he just couldn’t conceive of a system that could behave in such a way that you would be able to see the gravitational waves.

Karl Schwarzschild found the black-hole solution to Einstein’s equations in 1916, the same year Einstein predicted gravitational waves. Why didn’t Einstein believe in black holes after that?

Black holes themselves have a very controversial and complex history, and LIGO’s detection was the first really complete proof of the existence of black holes. In 1916 Einstein thought Schwarzschild had just discovered a physical simplification: Just as one would treat the Earth as a point mass [with its mass concentrated to a point] for simplicity, they thought the “Schwarzschild solution” — what we now call a black hole — treated the sun as a point mass just for convenience. They didn’t think it would ever be a real thing, where you would have the mass concentrated to a point. They thought that was impossible, outrageous. By the 1930s it was beginning to dawn on people, “You know, it’s not entirely clear to us that the theory prevents that from happening.” Gradually, people like Robert Oppenheimer, the famous director of the Los Alamos Laboratory for the Manhattan Project, began to show that it was possible for a star to collapse into itself until it actually created something that really did look like the Schwarzschild solution. And that work was taken up in the 1960s by John Wheeler’s group, of which Kip Thorne was one of the students, and they and others developed the theory of black holes.

How did people then figure out what the gravitational waves produced by merging black holes would look like on Earth?

A key problem was imposing the condition that there are no waves coming into the binary black hole system from infinitely far away, only waves going out to infinity. But that’s actually very hard to do, because you usually need a completely different mathematical formalism to describe the very distant gravitational field —at “infinity” or out here at Earth — than you need to describe the black holes themselves. People would try to do this calculation in the 1950s and ‘60s and they would get wrong answers. In some cases, they would get an answer that the black holes were gaining energy rather than losing it, because they made a mistake and had incoming waves bringing energy in from infinitely far away. So what happened in the course of the 1960s was that people like Roger Penrose, the great English relativist, did research on the structure of space-time. And Penrose discovered that there’s more than one infinity at the edge of space and time, and you have to pick the right infinity on which to impose your conditions. And then other people introduced techniques from fluid dynamics. These are just examples of many different conceptual and formulaic breakthroughs that had to be made.

caglecom

And then the next step was predicting the particular signals that LIGO’s detectors might pick up.

At one of my very first group meetings in Kip’s group as a young student — this was 1991 or so — he came in with a big sheet of paper, and he had typed up everything that needed to be done on the theory side if LIGO was going to work. Because the whole reason you can detect the signal is that it has this characteristic sweep, and you filter the data against it. But you can only filter if you know what the signal looks like, and since you’ve never seen it before, you can only know what it looks like if the theorists tell you. And so Kip said, I want everybody in the group to work on this. And that’s what we did.

You’d like to have a prediction of the waveform from the beginning of where LIGO could conceivably see the signal to the final stage where the black hole has settled back down again and is not emitting any more waves. But there’s no single method that can give you the whole thing. For the first stage, you can use approximation methods that were already around at that time, but it was realized that several orders of magnitude more levels of approximation would be needed, and this was very daunting. And then when the black holes are merging, the gravity is insanely strong, and so you need numerical methods, where you do the calculation on a supercomputer. There were a whole bunch of groups who were trying to do that, and they were confronted with serious challenges. They couldn’t evolve the two black holes over more than a tiny amount of time, which wouldn’t help at all. And so a few years ago, they basically decided, “We just don’t have a choice. We’ll keep changing our coordinate systems until we find something that works that doesn’t crash on us.” And a guy called Frans Pretorius found a way to do it, and the methods took off from there.

There’s this hope that LIGO will “open up a new window on the universe” by detecting gravitational waves from previously unknown astrophysical objects. Considering the effort that went into recognizing the signal from a black-hole merger, how will we be able to see the unexpected?

Yes, the real excitement would be to find something we didn’t expect. One possibility is that the unexpected might help us out by being a very large signal. Our hopes for that have been dampened somewhat, because the original LIGO was online for quite a while and if the signal were very large it might have seen it. It does look like the unexpected is not going to be easy, so how do we dig the signal out of the noise?

One answer is that there are certain kinds of techniques that people have been looking at where you don’t commit yourself to knowing precisely what the signal looks like, but you just look for certain kinds of regularities — for instance, maybe this unexpected signal is at least a periodic signal. And LIGO is certainly doing that. They even have an “Einstein@Home” project, where they’ll send a piece of LIGO data to your home computer if you sign up for this, and your computer will help look for simple things like that. Another approach is to use machine learning to try to teach machines to look for signals. You start with what you know, but there is some hope that over time these techniques might grow and develop to where they become sufficiently flexible to catch things that aren’t what you expect.

What do you take away from this story?

I am struck by the collective nature of the endeavor. It had to be a collaborative effort; each step was sufficiently difficult that it had to link to the next step. And collective efforts come with vitriol and disputes. People shouted at each other. But the finer qualities of human nature won out. People got over their anger. Einstein got over his anger. People admitted they were wrong. And eventually, as a community, we got there.

(QuantaMagazine-Interview)

LIGO most likely detected the shocks or vibrations of the Earth itself in which all celestial objects within the entire universe would mutually adjusting themselves as they are shifting around all the time under the influence of mutual gravitational attractions among themselves. Without any doubt that the existence of gravitaional waves which has turned out to be a BLUFF indeed.(KFC)

A HOLE IN THE UNIVERSE: IS THAT A CONFIRMATION FOR US ?

The history repeats itself, the famous of LIGO discovery in 2016 just repeated an error -  experiment is made based on belief - in the famous eclipse experiment of 1919.

There’s basically a hole in the universe -- a region where there’s much less matter than there should be. And we don’t know why it’s there.

 "For sure, there are regions of space with far less matter — stars, gas, dust, and even dark matter — than average. In fact, there are other voids that are of comparable magnitude that have been discovered since. One could cause this effect by a large region that was completely empty of galaxies, which is the “hole in the Universe” option that many reporters (and, ahem, press releases) flock to. But it could also be caused by something far less spectacular: a minor underdensity over a larger volume/longer slice of the Universe. Until we do a dedicated, 3D cosmic map (using spectroscopy to verify the redshift of the observed galaxies) over the region of interest, we won’t know for certain how these galaxies are distributed. But as far as what you’ve heard, there may not be an interesting void there at all, much less a region with no matter of any type." (Is This Actually A Hole In The Universe?-ForbesCom)

Why all the galaxies and stars near the hole do not follow the curved path of the hole? A hole in the universe as proof that in reality there is no such thing as warped space.

There are completely empty of galaxies, and many of galaxies arround it, one looks like redshifts and the other looks like blueshifts. So, how can one is expanding and the other not expanding? It is as proof that the expanding universe is not correct and proof that there are no gravitational redshifts but cosmological redshifts/blueshifts that cause by the refraction of light, not by gravity.
 
"A very big hole" in the universe truly a confirmation by the universe itself / self-proving that the general relativity theory, the expanding universe, and big bang theory  was wrong.

The Expansion of the Universe Debunked

The Big Bang Theory

A Flawed Concept

---

2016: New Era The Honesty In Science

---

The art how to force and stay funded

Einstein's Waves Is Made Based on Belief

In science fiction, space and time warps are a commonplace. They are used for rapid journeys around the galaxy, or for travel through time. But today's science fiction, is often tomorrow's science fact. (Stephen Hawking)

So, in this book below showing the facts how the general relativity theory misled physicists and astronomers for more than 100 years - opened eyes the scientific community in the world with a simple explanations and interesting analysis - that's all for the new generation of scientists and the future of science.

THE TRUTH OF THE COSMOLOGICAL REDSHIFT

Interesting Theory and Analysis, But I Want More
The author's contention is that Einstein ignored light refraction through the Earth's atmosphere when he desires used a method for validating his General Theory of Relativity in 1919. The author's analysis is compelling as we all learned about light refraction in science class with a pencil in a glass of water. However, it will make more research on my part to completely agree that Einstein's theory is to be dismissed based on this one test alone. (Customer Reviews-Verified Purchase)

---

LENSING BY REFRACTION, NOT GRAVITY. 

Professor R. C. Gupta at the Institute of Engineering & Technology in Lucknow, India has presented such a theory in a paper entitled, “Bending of Light Near a Star and Gravitational Red/Blue Shift: Alternative Explanation Based on Refraction of Light.”

The paper asserts that the theory behind gravitational lensing — one of the evidentiary “proofs” of General Relativity — is wrong, and that the lensing effect is caused by refraction through the “atmospheres” of stars and galaxies.

The paper also presents the mathematical basis for refraction and shows that refraction closely predicts the same lensing effect as attributed to gravity.

---

1.Is the cosmological redshift real, or is it an optical illusion caused by dust ?

The cosmological redshift seems to be real enough. For more about it see my article in Sky and Telescopemagazine, February 1993, which gives some background on how to interpret this phenomenon.

As the article explains, there are three ways that nature seems to be able to shift the wavelengths of spectral lines from atoms. The familiar Doppler shift is the one we all know from the passing siren. When it approaches, its pitch is higher than when it moves away from us. What works for sound waves also works for light waves, and we can see the Doppler shifts in the light from stars that orbit one another in space.

Einstein's theory of general relativity predicts two new ways of doing the same trick that don't involve motion as we normally think of it.

The gravitational redshift happens when light tries to escape from a gravitational field. This is actually a phenomenon that you can explain using ordinary newtonian physics. Thanks to Einstein's famous E= m c squared, and Planck's equally famous law relating the energy of light to its frequency, E = h x frequency, we can see that as a particle of light ( photon) moves out of a gravitational field, it must loose energy working against the gravitational field. Since photons always travel at the speed of light, the only place where this energy loss can show up is in a change of frequency. The frequency of the photon must decrease so that the energy carries by the photon is lower, and this corresponds to a 'red shift' to longer wavelengths. This phenomenon has been confirmed in laboratory experiments carried out by Pound and Rebka at Harvard University over 30 years ago. It's not a theory, its real.

Even more bizarre than the gravitational redshift is the so-called cosmological redshift. There is no known way to independently test for this because we cannot create a system as big as the universe to compare against. But we can look at other aspects of general relativity and see whether it gives the right results. All tests to date seem to suggest that general relativity is in pretty good shape, so that gives us confidence that something like the cosmological redshift might be a reality. Astronomical observations of distant galaxies reveal that we cannot explain their redshifts by either the Doppler or gravitational redshift mechanisms without ending up with unphysical answers. General relativity, in the guise of Big Bang cosmology, however, predicts just what we are seeing in terms of the redshift caused by the expansion of space. It's not an optical illusion any more than E=mc squared is. And it cannot be produced by any known mechanism that does not in some way have to do with gravitational fields.

(stanford.edu)

2.Gravitational redshift.

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 (i.e., a higher gravitational potential). There is a corresponding reduction in energy when electromagnetic radiation is red-shifted, as given by Planck's relation, due to the electromagnetic radiation propagating in opposition to the gravitational gradient. There also exists a corresponding blueshift when electromagnetic radiation propagates from an area of a weaker gravitational field to an area of a stronger gravitational field.

The gravitational redshift of a light wave as it moves upwards against a gravitational field (produced by the yellow star below). The effect is greatly exaggerated in this diagram.

If applied to optical wavelengths, this manifests itself as a change in the colour of visible light as the wavelength of the light is increased toward the red part of the light spectrum. Since frequency and wavelength are inversely proportional, this is equivalent to saying that the frequency of the light is reduced towards the red part of the light spectrum, giving this phenomenon the name redshift.

(wikipedia.org )


In general relativity, Einstein ignored light refraction, and proving method isn't scientific and deeply wrong.

Einstein proposed therefore, that photographs be taken of the stars immediately bordering the darkened face of the sun during an eclipse and compared with photographs of those same stars made at another time. According to his theory, the light from the stars surrounding the sun should be bent inward, toward the sun, in traversing the sun’s gravitational field; hence the images of these stars should appear to observer on earth to be shifted outward from their usual positions in the sky.

The proving method for hypothesis as suggested by Einstein as the theory founder should not be able to be carried out, considering the fact that in scientific exposure in astronomy, the instant observation applies. It means, all calculations to determine the ‘true position’ and the ‘apparent position’ of a certain star at the sky is only applicable at a certain time and at a certain place on which such observation is performed.

The observation on a star conducted twice from the places with different geographical positions will result the different height/altitude and azimuth of the star. The altitude and azimuth of a star indicates the position of the star at the time when the observation is performed. The altitude and azimuth of a star changes every time due to the daily movement of the said space objects.

Therefore, the proving method as conducted by Arthur Eddington, should not be able to be performed. Moreover, the observation / photo taking for the stars were performed twice with sufficiently long different interval of time.

In astronomy, the light deviation is something very common, and not caused by gravity field of a massive object, but it occurs due to  the light refraction. Light refraction causes the light of all objects in the sky reaching the earth and seen by the observers, has been deviated by the media to pass through, including the light bending by the earth atmosphere.

The magnitude of light deviation in astronomy is known as  'Astronomical Refraction' and 'Terrestrial Refraction'.

It is really hard to understand that the proving method was conducted by a team led by Arthur Eddington.

The Cosmological Redshift  causes by light refraction, not gravity.

General Relativity has been wrong since the beginning.  There is no 'Gravitational redshift', but 'The Cosmological Redshift' causes by light refraction, not gravity. The cosmological redshift actually a mirage.

Mirages are not optical illusions, as many people think. They are real phenomena of atmospheric optics, caused by strong ray-bending in layers with steep thermal gradients. Because mirages are real physical phenomena, they can be photographed.

Common misconceptions.It is incorrect to say (as even some textbooks do) that a mirage is an image in the wrong place, because atmospheric refraction displaces almost everything we see from its geometric position — that is, rays of light in the lower atmosphere are usually curved, because the density of air usually decreases steadily with increasing height. Thus, everything normally appears displaced slightly above its geometric or “true” position. This displacement is known as terrestrial refraction when the object is inside the atmosphere, and astronomical refraction when it is beyond the atmosphere. While these effects are usually small enough to escape casual observation with the naked eye, they are very severe problems in fields such as geodesy and positional astronomy, because they can be hundreds or even thousands of times larger than measurement errors.(www-rohan.sdsu.edu)




What causes a mirage?

Edwin Meyer, a physics professor at Baldwin-Wallace College, explains.

To understand how a mirage forms, one must first understand how light travels through air. If the air is all the same temperature--cold or hot--light travels through it in a straight line. If a steady temperature gradient exists, however, light will follow a curved path toward the cooler air. The standard freshman physics explanation for this phenomenon is that cold air has a higher index of refraction than warm air does. As a result, photons (particles of light) travel through hot air faster than they can through cold air because the hot air is less dense. The quantum electrodynamics explanation is that photons always take the path of minimum time when traveling from one point to another. In order to get from one point to another in a minimum time, photons will take "shortcuts" even though the length of the path is curved and it covers a longer distance than the direct route.

Mirages are a direct result of photons taking the path of minimum time in vertical temperature gradients. Ideal conditions for a mirage are still air on a hot, sunny day over a flat surface that will absorb the sun's energy and become quite hot. When these conditions exist, the air closest to the surface is hottest and least dense and the air density gradually increases with height. Incoming photons take a curved path from the sky to the viewer's eye. The illusion comes from the fact that quantum electrodynamics is not intuitive and the human brain assumes that light travels in a straight line. A viewer looking at, say, the road ahead on a hot, still, day will see the sky because photons from the sky are taking the curved path that minimizes the time taken. The brain interprets this as water on the road because water would reflect light from the sky in much the same way that a vertical temperature gradient does.

A simple experiment can demonstrate the manner in which a light beam bends in a vertical density gradient. Fill a long glass tank with water, dissolve sugar in the water and shine a laser beam in one end. The vertical gradient produced by the sugar concentration will cause the beam to bend. If the tank is long enough and a mirror is placed on the bottom, the beam will "bounce" along the bottom of the tank.

( scientificamerican.com )

 

More about Astronomy:

1.Light bending/deviation is the difference between Hc and Ho

Taking a sight using the intercept method (Marcq St. Hilaire)consists of the following process:

Observe the altitude above the horizon Ho of a celestial body and note the time of the observation.Assume a certain geographical position (lat., lon.), it does not matter which one so long as it is within, say, 50 NM of the actual position (or even 100 NM would not introduce too much error). Compute the altitude Hc and azimuth Zn with which an observer situated at that assumed position would observe the body.

If the actual observed altitude Ho is smaller than the computed altitude Hc this means the observer is farther away from the body than the observer at the assumed position, and vice versa. For each minute of arc the distance is one NM and the difference between Hc and Ho expressed in minutes of arc (which equal NM) is termed the "intercept". The navigator now has computed the intercept and azimuth of the body.

On the chart he marks the assumed position AP and draws a line in the direction of the azimuth Zn. He then measures the intercept distance along this azimuth line, towards the body if Ho>Hc and away from it if Ho<Hc. At this new point he draws a perpendicular to the azimuth line and that is the line of position LOP at the moment of the observation.

The reason that the chosen AP is not important (within limits) is that if a position closer to the body is chosen then Hc will be greater but the distance will be measured from the new AP which is closer to the body and the end resulting LOP will be the same.

The relevant formulas (derived using the spherical trigonometric identities) are:

Where

    Hc = Computed altitude
    Zn = Computed azimuth
    lat = Latitude
    dec = Declination
    LHA = Local Hour Angle 

(wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercept_method)


2.Determining Position Using a Sextant

We are quite spoiled in this modern age of GPS:  We always know our exact position on the surface of the earth, and we never have to pick up a calculator to figure it out. I recently counted the GPS devices aboard Three@Sea and discovered that there are eight of them! Except in extraordinary circumstances, I have confidence that one of our on-board devices will be able to tell us (or a search party) where we are.

But what about extraordinary circumstances? What if we experience a catastrophic lightening strike that takes out all of our electronics? What if a massive solar flare disables the global GPS system for awhile? And there are probably a few other scenarios under which GPS might become temporarily unavailable. If one of these extreme scenarios occurs while we’re in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, we would like to be able to figure out where we are, primarily so we can get to where we’re going.

Okay — I doubt any of those catastrophic things will happen. But I’m a geek with a scientific curiosity about celestial navigation, as well as a certain nostalgia for the ways of the ancient mariner. So about six months ago I decided to learn the basics of using a sextant to determine our position, and to teach Ayla how to do it as well (the poor girl). I haven’t been able to spend much time on it, so progress has been slow, but today Ayla and I took our first actual hands-on sights to determine our position, and we had a blast!

To learn how to use a sextant to find our position I’ve read three books on the subject, and I’ve also read the manual that came with the sextant (Davis Mark 25). The first two books were complete treatments of celestial navigation, full of spherical trigonometry and lots of calculations. Let me tell you, these books could cure even the most severe case of insomnia. Although I could follow along with a lot of it, I found myself saying, “This is too hard, and not very fun. I’ve got GPS devices that can tell me where I am, so why am I putting myself through this!?!” But alas, I kept coming back to it.


( David's Voyage )

---

2016: New Era The Honesty In Science

---

THE EVIDENCE: A REVELATION OF UNIVERSAL LAW IS MISLEADING

UNIVERSE AND DR. EINSTEIN, LINCOLN BARNETT, LONDON, 1949, PREFACE BY ALBERT EINSTEIN HIMSELF, PAGE 38 .

A revelation of universal law: The Velocity of Light Is Constant.

He began by rejecting the ether theory and with it the whole idea of space as a fixed system or framework, absolutely at rest, within which it is possible to distinguish absolute from relative motion. The one indisputable fact established by the Michelson-Morley experiment was that the velocity of light in unaffected by the motion of the earth. Einstein seized on this as a revelation of universal law. If the velocity of light is constant regardless of the earth's motion, he reasoned, it must be constant regardless of motion of any Sun, moon, star, meteor, or other syatem moving anywhere in universe. From this he drew a broader generalization, and asserted that the laws of nature are the same for alls uniformly moving system. This simple statement is the essence of Einstein's Special theory of Relativity.(Universe and Dr.Einstein,Lincoln Barnett,London,1949, preface by Albert Einstein himself, page 38)

The Speed of Light and the Index of Refraction

"Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light."

"Light always travels at the same speed."

Have you heard these statements before? They are often quoted as results of Einstein's theory of relativity. Unfortunately, these statements are somewhat misleading. Let's add a few words to them to clarify. "Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light in a vacuum." "Light in a vacuum always travels at the same speed." Those additional three words in a vacuum are very important. A vacuum is a region with no matter in it. So a vacuum would not contain any dust particles (unlike a vacuum cleaner, which is generally full of dust particles). (www.rpi.edu/dept/phys).


Speed of light is reduced cause by refraction when the starlight passing through the Earth's atmosphere. But the speed of gravity - for example in the event of tide-low tide due to the influence of the Moon  - is not reduced even though passing through Earth's atmosphere and  Moon's atmosphere. From this incident could be concluded that the speed of gravity faster than the speed of light. Therefore, 'nothing can travel faster than the speed of light in a vacuum'  is not correct. The speed of gravity is infinity or gravity instataneous.

If gravitational waves exist, it is should be in the speed faster than c, speed of light in vacuum.

GPS Doesn't Need and Doen't Use Einstein's Theory of Special or General Relativity. Why? Let's see picture below:

Time-delay of light cause by refraction, not Gravity. 

Dlr (in red curve) is a litle bit longer than Dso (in white straight line)

---

NOW WE KNOW Originally Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity Is Wrong and Misleading.

---

HOW WE KNOW EINSTEN WAS WRONG

How We Know Gravity is Not (Just) a Force

 Description of Eddington's experiment from the illustrated London News (1919)

When  we think of gravity, we typically think of it as a force between masses.  When you step on a scale, for example, the number on the scale represents the pull of the Earth’s gravity on your mass, giving you weight.  It is easy to imagine the gravitational force of the Sun holding the planets in their orbits, or the gravitational pull of a black hole.  Forces are easy to understand as pushes and pulls.

But we now understand that gravity as a force is only part of a more complex phenomenon described the theory of general relativity.  While general relativity is an elegant theory, it’s a radical departure from the idea of gravity as a force.  As Carl Sagan once said, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence,” and Einstein’s theory is a very extraordinary claim.  But it turns out there are several extraordinary experiments that confirm the curvature of space and time.

The key to general relativity lies in the fact that everything in a gravitational field falls at the same rate.  Stand on the Moon and drop a hammer and a feather, and they will hit the surface at the same time.  The same is true for any object regardless of its mass or physical makeup, and this is known as the equivalence principle.

Since everything falls in the same way regardless of its mass, it means that without some external point of reference, a free-floating observer far from gravitational sources and a free-falling observer in the gravitational field of a massive body each have the same experience. For example, astronauts in the space station look as if they are floating without gravity.  Actually, the gravitational pull of the Earth on the space station is nearly as strong as it is at the surface.  The difference is that the space station (and everything in it) is falling.  The space station is in orbit, which means it is literally falling around the Earth.

This equivalence between floating and falling is what Einstein used to develop his theory.  In general relativity, gravity is not a force between masses.  Instead gravity is an effect of the warping of space and time in the presence of mass.  Without a force acting upon it, an object will move in a straight line.  If you draw a line on a sheet of paper, and then twist or bend the paper, the line will no longer appear straight.  In the same way, the straight path of an object is bent when space and time is bent.  This explains why all objects fall at the same rate.  The gravity warps spacetime in a particular way, so the straight paths of all objects are bent in the same way near the Earth.

So what kind of experiment could possibly prove that gravity is warped spacetime?  One stems from the fact that light can be deflected by a nearby mass.  It is often argued that since light has no mass, it shouldn’t be deflected by the gravitational force of a body.  This isn’t quite correct. Since light has energy, and by special relativity mass and energy are equivalent, Newton’s gravitational theory predicts that light would be deflected slightly by a nearby mass.  The difference is that general relativity predicts it will be deflected twice as much.

The effect was first observed by Arthur Eddington in 1919.  Eddington traveled to the island of Principe off the coast of West Africa to photograph a total eclipse. He had taken photos of the same region of the sky sometime earlier. By comparing the eclipse photos and the earlier photos of the same sky, Eddington was able to show the apparent position of stars shifted when the Sun was near.  The amount of deflection agreed with Einstein, and not Newton.  Since then we’ve seen a similar effect where the light of distant quasars and galaxies are deflected by closer masses.  It is often referred to as gravitational lensing, and it has been used to measure the masses of galaxies, and even see the effects of dark matter.

Another piece of evidence is known as the time-delay experiment.  The mass of the Sun warps space near it, therefore light passing near the Sun is doesn’t travel in a perfectly straight line.  Instead it travels along a slightly curved path that is a bit longer.  This means light from a planet on the other side of the solar system from Earth reaches us a tiny bit later than we would otherwise expect.  The first measurement of this time delay was in the late 1960s by Irwin Shapiro.  Radio signals were bounced off Venus from Earth when the two planets were almost on opposite sides of the sun. The measured delay of the signals’ round trip was about 200 microseconds, just as predicted by general relativity.  This effect is now known as the Shapiro time delay, and it means the average speed of light (as determined by the travel time) is slightly slower than the (always constant) instantaneous speed of light.

( UniverseToday )

HOW WE KNOW EINSTEIN WAS WRONG 

 Correct illustration, apparent position of star always looks higher than true position of star.

1."Since everything falls in the same way regardless of its mass, it means that without some external point of reference, a free-floating observer far from gravitational sources and a free-falling observer in the gravitational field of a massive body each have the same experience. For example, astronauts in the space station look as if they are floating without gravity.  Actually, the gravitational pull of the Earth on the space station is nearly as strong as it is at the surface.  The difference is that the space station (and everything in it) is falling.  The space station is in orbit, which means it is literally falling around the Earth."

It refers to thought experiments that are incomprehensive, illogical, and misleading.Thought experiments can be made to obtain the result they wanted to get. Albert Einstein made a mistake in his thought experiments.
,

2."This equivalence between floating and falling is what Einstein used to develop his theory.  In general relativity, gravity is not a force between masses.  Instead gravity is an effect of the warping of space and time in the presence of mass.  Without a force acting upon it, an object will move in a straight line.  If you draw a line on a sheet of paper, and then twist or bend the paper, the line will no longer appear straight.  In the same way, the straight path of an object is bent when space and time is bent.  This explains why all objects fall at the same rate.  The gravity warps spacetime in a particular way, so the straight paths of all objects are bent in the same way near the Earth." 
 

The equivalence pinciple is based on the thought experiment. This principle is false.

Remember, it is not curved space, but the human mind which cannot comprehend infinity and eternity! ( Nicola Tesla).

In science fiction, space and time warps are a commonplace. They are used for rapid journeys around the galaxy, or for travel through time. But today's science fiction, is often tomorrow's science fact. So what are the chances for space and time warps. (Stephen Hawking ).

3."So what kind of experiment could possibly prove that gravity is warped spacetime?  One stems from the fact that light can be deflected by a nearby mass.  It is often argued that since light has no mass, it shouldn’t be deflected by the gravitational force of a body.  This isn’t quite correct. Since light has energy, and by special relativity mass and energy are equivalent, Newton’s gravitational theory predicts that light would be deflected slightly by a nearby mass.  The difference is that general relativity predicts it will be deflected twice as much."

There is no such thing as warped spacetime. Deflection of starlight is something very common that cause by refraction, not gravity

"Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light."

"Light always travels at the same speed."

Have you heard these statements before? They are often quoted as results of Einstein's theory of relativity. Unfortunately, these statements are somewhat misleading. Let's add a few words to them to clarify. "Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light in a vacuum." "Light in a vacuum always travels at the same speed."  Those additional three words in a vacuum are very important. A vacuum is a region with no matter in it. So a vacuum would not contain any dust particles ( www.rpi.edu )


4."The effect was first observed by Arthur Eddington in 1919.  Eddington traveled to the island of Principe off the coast of West Africa to photograph a total eclipse. He had taken photos of the same region of the sky sometime earlier. By comparing the eclipse photos and the earlier photos of the same sky, Eddington was able to show the apparent position of stars shifted when the Sun was near.  The amount of deflection agreed with Einstein, and not Newton."

Einstein's proving method for his hypothesis the deflection of light by the Sun isn't scientific and deeply wrong ..............

 5."It is often referred to as gravitational lensing, and it has been used to measure the masses of galaxies, and even see the effects of dark matter."

Lensing by refraction, not gravity.About dark matter, the trouble was, nobody could explain what this “dark matter” was.(13 things that do not make sense, NewScientist)

 6."Another piece of evidence is known as the time-delay experiment.  The mass of the Sun warps space near it, therefore light passing near the Sun is doesn’t travel in a perfectly straight line.  Instead it travels along a slightly curved path that is a bit longer.  This means light from a planet on the other side of the solar system from Earth reaches us a tiny bit later than we would otherwise expect.  The first measurement of this time delay was in the late 1960s by Irwin Shapiro.  Radio signals were bounced off Venus from Earth when the two planets were almost on opposite sides of the sun. The measured delay of the signals’ round trip was about 200 microseconds, just as predicted by general relativity.  This effect is now known as the Shapiro time delay, and it means the average speed of light (as determined by the travel time) is slightly slower than the (always constant) instantaneous speed of light."

The time-delay of light cause by refraction, not gravity. Please see picture below, A'-B is a straight line light of Apparent position, and A - B is a curved path of  True position..A curved path A - B is a bit longer than A' - B. That's evidence in reality there is no such thing as spacetime or warped space, The time-delay experiment nothing to do with special and general relativity theory, but the time-delay of light cause by refraction, namely astronomical refraction and terrestrial refraction.

---

NOW WE KNOW ALBERT EINSTEIN WAS WRONG.

---

"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the Mysterious":

That's why his theory of relativity mislead many of scientists, and has raised many of hypothesis were included in the 9 biggest unsolved mysteries in physics.

The mysterious of Einstein's theory of general relativity is about space-time and warped space. In reality, there is no such thing as warped space. The idea of warped space come from not knowing where does gravity come from.

The Earth's gravity is a force that come from Earth's Radiation. The Earth received energy in the form of radiation from the Sun. For the Earth to remain in balance the energy coming into and leaving the Earth must equal.

Gravity is the force due to the effects of well balanced universe, and the force to maintain the well balanced universe.

Isaac Newton was right and Albert Einstein was wrong.

The deflection of starlight cause by refraction, not by gravity field of massive objects / the Sun. 

Lensing cause by refraction, not gravity.

The time-delay of light cause by refraction, namely astronomical refraction and terrestrial refraction, so GPS doesn't need and doesn't use special and general relativity.

Dark matter, dark energy ...and the other ...do not make sense !

Kindle eBook