General Relativity Theory “confirmed” by cosmogonists once again

PSI Blog 20190821 General Relativity Theory “confirmed” by cosmogonists once again

An artist's rendering of a supermassive black hole. NASA-JPL-Caltech

From George Coyne, Vancouver PSI Director:


Astronomers claim General Relativity Theory (GRT) is confirmed from monitoring the star S0-2 orbiting the super massive black hole Sagittarius A* at the center of the Milky Way.  They base their conclusion on GRT's prediction of gravitational redshift, which proposes that light is distorted by gravity. 

You have written on how redshift is misinterpreted. You may wish to respond in a blog on the flaws in this study's conclusion that this proves Einstein's GRT is correct.

Here is another NBC news article on the same study.

An Einstein glorification video on the same topic (this one from National Geographic):

 [GB: Thanks so much George. As you know, unlike other theories well-accepted by the mainstream (e.g., heliocentricity, evolution, and plate tectonics), there have been doubts about relativity for over a century. So-called “confirmations” are brought forth habitually to give it credence it does not deserve.  This black hole misinterpretation is one of the major Einsteinisms used to “prove” “Einstein is always right.” It is spread all over the news almost every time light from a massive cosmic source is found to have experienced “gravitational redshift.” In GRT (General Relativity Theory) Einstein predicted that, in struggling against the force of gravity, light particles would lose energy whenever they left a massive light source. The phenomenon was proven experimentally by Pound and associates at Harvard.[1]

The data from cosmic light sources are likewise unquestionable. The only problem: The interpretation is incorrect. One of Einstein’s major ad hocs in Special Relativity Theory was the assumption that light was a massless particle. It could not be affected by gravitation and would never satisfy Newton’s famous equation (F=GM1M2/r2). Another ad hoc was his famous assumption that light always traveled at c.

Now, as I emphasized in Infinite Universe Theory and my recent manuscript,[2] light is a wave in the aether. Its velocity depends on the properties of that medium. Aether pressure (and light velocity) increases with distance from massive bodies. The “gravitational redshift” occurs because light waves increase in velocity as they travel away from their source. Although the effect is tiny, light’s wavelength increases in the same way it does when light leaves the water medium at 225,000,000 m/s and enters the air medium at 300,000,000 m/s. Remember that red light has a wavelength of 488 nm in water and 650 nm in air, with no change in frequency, which is responsible for its color.

This Einsteinism, like the one in which refraction was mistaken as “proof of curved empty space,” will be with us until GRT finally succumbs to the needed philosophical change, finally and quietly entering the “dustbin of history.”]

[1] Pound, R.V., and Rebka, G.A., 1960, Apparent Weight of Photons: Physical Review Letters, v. 4, no. 7, p. 337-341. [http://go.glennborchardt.com/PR60]; Pound, R.V., and Snider, J.L., 1964, Effect of Gravity on Nuclear Resonance: Physical Review Letters, v. 13, no. 18, p. 539-540. [http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.13.539]; Pound, R.V., and Snider, J.L., 1965, Effect of Gravity on Gamma Radiation: Physical Review, v. 140, no. 3B, p. B788-B802.

[2] Borchardt, Glenn, 2017, Infinite Universe Theory: Berkeley, California, Progressive Science Institute, 343 p. [http://go.glennborchardt.com/IUTebook]; Borchardt, Glenn, 2018, The Physical Cause of Gravitation: viXra:1806.0165.


Bligh said...

It is impossible for light to have its wavelength altered without the reciprocal change in frequency.
I forget the equation. Is it C=lamda/frequency???

Glenn Borchardt said...


Reread this from IUT p. 207:

"The refractive index (n) for water is (300,000,000 m/s)/(225,000,000 m/s)=1.333. The wavelength of light is shortened to 75% of what it is in air. Thus, red light with a wavelength of 650 nm in air has a wavelength of 488 nm in water. As in the NOAA example, the number of cycles per second (frequency), however, remains unchanged."

That is why red laser light at 650 nm in air is still red at 488 nm in water. Maybe you are thinking of the supposed 1:1 wavelength/frequency relationship in "vacuum." Because there is no perfectly empty space, that relationship is never perfect either. Because Pound-Rebka assumed a perfect vacuum, they had to use the time-worn "time dilation" for explaining Cosmological Redshift instead of distally increasing aether pressure.