(Mitchell) wrote in message news:<9c3da975.0402032021.485cd57c@posting.google.com>...
Tom Roberts <tjroberts@Lucent.com> wrote in message news:<401FFF46.1030305@Lucent.com>...
On 2/2/2004 6:39 PM, Mitchell wrote:
The problems of the infinities encountered in General Relativity
occure before the so called singularity. They begin at the event
horizon. An infinite Einstein shift provides proof of the
failure of the theory.
Not true. For a black hole there is indeed an infinite redshift for a
light ray emitted by a source at the horizon and a detector located far
away outside. All that means is that such a light ray cannot propagate
out to that detector. This is no more surprising than your inability to
see a friend after she goes around the (opaque) corner of a building --
some regions of the world are not observable to you. <shrug>
Unless you choose to believe in null photons
where light simply is energyless. What nonsense.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say.
What don't you get? What is the wavelength of a photon at an event
horizon?
GR has to become a limited strength gravity theory.
GR cannot "become" anything other than what it is.
GR must be modified altogether.
A new view of gravity's strength is required. One where curved space-time
is seen as an acceleration equivalent.
Hmmm. In a rather loose sense, GR does that. The loosness is in your
words, not in GR.
Einstein said that his quantum leap was that he saw that
curvature(space-time) is equivalent to acceleration.
That is that the strength of
gravity is seen as a limited acceleration. The limit is C or light speed.
Acceleration is incommensurate with "C or light speed". Your statement
is like trying to express the weight of an object in days -- it does not
make sense.
The sense I am trying to make is that of the equivalence of
weight in gravity(acceleration*mass) is equivalent to any
weight you might experience in steady state acceleration.
There is a limit to the acceleration because there is a limit to motion.
My example for limited strength gravity is revealed in weight
first. But it shows up in freefall as relativistic additions
of velocity.
Tom Roberts tjroberts@lucent.com
If you have a speed limit you cannot accelerate faster than
the limit otherwise you would break the limit.
If you(whoever) cannot understand that then you really are a moron.
To clarify where I am coming from let me say that
I am not arguing against Relativity. I believe that
the fundamental principles of both GR and SR come
together in an even more powerful way. I call this
theory of limited gravity the Special theory of General Relativity.
Einstein knew matter couldn't reach the speed of light.
This got overlooked in the case of falling, of black holes.
The extreme of gravity is a singular point where the strength
is a proper lightspeed acceleration. But nothing is falling
when the singularity is reached. So nothing ever actually
reaches(falls at) the speed light.
The strength of gravity must be limited. I can show how this is to
be done in principle.
As evidence for my theory I put forward that the strength of
gravity will not drop off as fast as GR predicts for masses
smaller than the earth. Using the earth and solar system as
our standard.
It is being claimed that this is actually being seen.
The variable gravity people have done me a great favor in citing
this.
Best Regards from
Mitch Raemsch
-- Time moves forward -- in every direction --
.
