In transit gravitational redshift

Hi David, You posted a lot of interesting stuff but where is it said that the atom's photon process is slowed down? Maybe this a semantic thing. The photons are redshifted-we agree on that detail of the process. The timing of the redshift is where I think we don't agree. You say in a gravity field the atom is forced to emit photons redder than they would in the absense of gravity and I suspect that is not the case at all. It seems to me the redshift happens after the photon is emitted. Can you do an experiment in an accelerator to prove which is the correct timing here?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jim</i>
<br />The timing of the redshift is where I think we don't agree. You say in a gravity field the atom is forced to emit photons redder than they would in the absense of gravity and I suspect that is not the case at all. It seems to me the redshift happens after the photon is emitted.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Before I say any more, why don’t you give me your opinion of what happens, what causes the redshift. If you say the light is emitted at the sun at the very same frequency it is emitted at the earth, then what causes the sun’s light to redshift while it’s on its way to the earth?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jim</i>
<br />Hi David, <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Jim, could you give me some feedback about my ideas? For example, what do you think causes the gravitational redshift? I’ve been working pretty much alone with my ideas, and I need some feedback. I don’t want to present a whole “theory” and then have it picked apart because of mistakes I’ve made. So let me know how you think the redshift occurs, and maybe we can exchange ideas about it.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by DAVID</i>
<br />Could you explain this mystery in a little more detail, please?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">An atomic clock slows its rate of ticking in a stronger gravitational potential, or when moving relative to a gravitational potential. (Both are the same mechanism -- more elysium encountered per second, making all electromagnetic phenomena propagate more slowly). No human adjustments are involved in either case.

Both effects are confirmed to within a few percent by GPS. These days, there is no longer experimental room to doubt that clocks really do change their rates of ticking as relativity predicts. But there is plenty of room for a better physical interpretation, such as the one I mentioned here. -|Tom|-

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by tvanflandern</i>
<br /><blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by DAVID</i>
<br />Could you explain this mystery in a little more detail, please?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">An atomic clock slows its rate of ticking in a stronger gravitational potential, or when moving relative to a gravitational potential. (Both are the same mechanism -- more elysium encountered per second, making all electromagnetic phenomena propagate more slowly). No human adjustments are involved in either case.

Both effects are confirmed to within a few percent by GPS. These days, there is no longer experimental room to doubt that clocks really do change their rates of ticking as relativity predicts. But there is plenty of room for a better physical interpretation, such as the one I mentioned here. -|Tom|-
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Hmm, sound like Lorentz relativity theory, 1895, if we substitute the word “elysium” for his term “the ether”. Hafele and Keating are supposed to have recorded Eastbound clock slowdowns and Westbound clock speedups as if the “elysium” were not rotating with the earth.

Where does this term “elysium” come from? I’ve never heard of it before and I can’t find much about it on Google. Is this one of your new terms? Could we call this just “gravitational potential points” that are stronger or “denser” near masses and that might not rotate with the earth?

DAVID,

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> I’ve never heard of it before and I can’t find much about it on Google. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">


Perhaps you can substitute "elysium" with the Higgs Field for now ... Tom?