An introduction to Refractional Redshift, and how it was confused with gravitational redshift (updated)
AN INTRODUCTION TO REFRACTIONAL REDSHIFT, AND HOW
IT WAS CONFUSED WITH GRAVITATIONAL REDSHIFT. GENERAL RELATIVITY DEBUNKED.
Marius L. Vasile @Vasile Effect
In this paper I will prove that
refraction causes a redshift, which I cleverly named Refractional
redshift, and that this redshift was not so cleverly confused with
gravitational redshift by the world's finest scientists- we're talking Harvard,
Nobel prize level here- which were either ignorant of refraction, or doctors in
doctoring experiments with it.
Refractional redshift is by far the most
common and yet unknown type of redshift- certainly for astronomers, who have no
ideea that it exists. It is caused due to the fact that during refraction the
speed of light changes, but the frequency remains constant. Since f=v/lambda,
where lambda is the wavelength, it immediately follows that the wavelength
changes too in order to preserve the frequency. This results in an increase of
wavelength or a redshift when the speed of light increases, and in a decrease
in wavelength or a blueshift when its speed decreases.
The demonstration is quite simple, as we
only need two simple equations in order to show that refraction causes a
redshift or a blueshift.
The first is the wave equation f=v/λ, or
λ=v/f
and the second is the refraction
equation n=c/v, or v=c/n
(where n is the index of refraction
of the medium, v is the speed of light in a medium, and c is the speed of
light in a vacuum)
We insert the second into the first and
we get λ=c/nf.
Since f is constant during refraction,
and c is also constant, we see that when the index of refraction n increases,
the wavelength decreases (shifts to blue), and when n decreases the wavelength
increases (shifts to red).
For two mediums with refractive
index n1 and n2, wavelength is directly proportional with
speed: λ1/λ2=v1/v2,
and inversely proportional with
the index of refraction: λ1/ λ2=n2/n1
For example during refraction from the
sun's atmosphere or heliosphere into space, the index of refraction decreases
from n>1 to n=1 and the speed of light increases from v to c, so the
wavelength also increases and the light emitted by the sun gets shifted to
red. This would also explain why
almost all galaxies appear redshifted, since they are made of stars which are
all redshifted from refraction.
Before reaching space there are,
however, multiple refractions inside the sun’s atmosphere, which has many
layers with different indexes of refraction, which regress as they aproach
space (i.e. the outer layers have a lower index than the inner layers, which
are more dense). So the light emiited by the sun gets more and more redshifted
as it refracts through these layers before it reaches into space, the final
frontier, and gets refracted and redshifted again.
And those who claim that the
'gravitational potential' of the sun is causing a shift in wavelength, or a
gravitational shift, are simply ignoring the laws of refraction, which explains
quite simply why light is redshifted near massive objects, which are all
surrounded by dense atmospheres made from gases such as hydrogen and helium
which affect the speed and wavelength of light.
It is important to understand that light
does not always propagate at a constant speed c, which is the speed of light in
a vacuum. In every other situation, when it encounters a medium, it travels at
slower speeds, which varies with the index of refraction of the mediums,
n=c/v. So instead of c, it travels at a lower speed v=c/n.
Therefore, when we observe a redshift,
we must not assume that light has travelled at a fixed speed (or c in a vacuum)
until it reached us. And associate the redshift with a drop in frequency, as
scientists do, because they dont take variable speed of light from refraction
into account, and use c as the standard value for the speed of light, instead
of v=c/n. So by ignoring the mediums in which light traveled, they erroneusly
apply the formula f=c/λ, instead of f=v/λ=c/nλ. Thus, if λ increases or decreases,
they will erroneusly conclude that frequency changed too, and illogically
define redshift as such:
'In physics, a redshift is
an increase in the wavelength, and corresponding decrease in the frequency and photon energy, of electromagnetic
radiation (such
as light).' -Wikipedia
While it may be well be true that frequency decreases in
the Doppler redshift, it certainly does not imply that ALL redshifts in the
universe will do the same thing !
And certainly not in refractional
redshift, where an increase of wavelength can occur without any decrease
in frequency, because the speed of the wave will increase.
And this is exactly what happened in the
famous Pound and Rebka gravitational redshift experiment.
Because that experiment was not done in
a vacuum, but in the earth’s atmosphere, in which a bag of helium was
added ‘to minimise scattering’. More specifically, the gamma ray traveled
through the helium bag, and then through air, as the metal target and the
detector were placed outside the helium bag, as shown in the picture below.
'The gamma rays traveled through a Mylar bag filled with helium to minimize scattering’ (wikipedia)
It doesn’t take a genius to realise that
the gammaray was refracted from helium into air, which has a higher index of
refraction than helium, causing its wavelength to decrease and shift to blue,
or increase and shift to red, depending on the different setups of the
experiment (in other setup they placed the emitter under the helium tube, and
the detector above it, creating an air to helium refraction and a refractional
redshift). The gammaray was indeed shifted, but by refraction, and not by
gravitation. Yet for Harvard University and the Nobel Academy this was a
gravitational shift, just like Einstein predicted.
Except Einstein did not predict that
gravitational redshift occurs in the presence of helium, and nowhere in his
proposed tests of general relativity does helium appear*. Why does it appear in
this experiment, then ?
Because, there simply was no
gravitational shift in the absence of helium. So they blamed it on ‘scattering’
from air, not on Einstein’s theory being wrong, and thrown in a bag of helium
to prove it right. But it simply does not follow how the use of helium leads to
a gravitational shift, because it simply follows that will only lead to a
refractional shift.
Because the helium and air mediums in
which the experiment was set obviously caused a refraction of the gammaray and
a change in its speed and wavelength. So what they observed was just a
Refractional redshift/blueshift, and not a gravitational one.
The only logical conclusion of that experiment
is that refractional redshift exists and it was confused (deliberately or not)
with gravitational redshift by the researchers. Their Nobel prize should be
cancelled and the scientific community should immediatelly revise all
experiments which claim that confirmed general relativity. Because this
experiment did not confirm general relativity at all, and in fact it infirmed
it. Since the shift was caused by refraction, and not by gravitation.
Given that helium is not gravity, and it
does not appear in Einstein’s theory of general relativity or in his proposed
tests to confirm it, Pound and Rebka should have not used it in this
gravitational experiment, unless they were really desperate. Indeed, they were
so desperate to get the Nobel prize, that they even drilled holes in the floors
of their Harvard university (presumably to impress the Nobel jury). When they
could have simply used the stair well (as a gravitational well, of course). So
adding a bag of helium to produce a redshift out of thin air, was just another
act of desperation.
This experiment should have been
performed ideally in a vacuum or, if not possible, in the same medium in order
to avoid refraction and refractional shift. As it was, it did not prove
anything other than refraction changes the wavelength, which was probably known
at the time by some scientists, including some Harvard ones, but excluding the
Nobel ones. And the Nobel Academy is ultimately responsable for reviewing,
approving, and awarding Harvard’s completely failed (or doctored) experiment.
Pound and Rebka attempted to prove that
gravity causes redshift by the absurd addition of helium, which is not gravity
and is never mentioned by Einstein in his general relativity. Because it
has absolutely nothing to do with it.
Maybe they liked playing with helium,
but even kids know that it alters the sound waves. This is also what happens to
light waves. And the Nobel academy should have known this as well, and
immediatelly call the scam instead of awarding it. But they fell for it because
they did not know that refraction changes the wavelength and causes
redshift/blueshift, which is also true for mainstream scientists today, who all
confuse refractional redshift with gravitational redshift.
Furthermore, it can be easily proven that all the
subsequent experiments which allegedly have proved general relativity, such as
the Shapiro gravitational time delay and Gravity probe, are based on the same
fundamental error which stems from the misunderstanding of basic refraction
physics. Those experiments simply do not take into consideration the fact that
radio waves slow down near massive objects because they refract into their
atmosphere, thus increasing the time it takes the radio signal to pass through
them. Hence the time delay is caused simply by refraction, not by gravitational
time dillation.
So
most if not all all of the experiments which are claimed to have proven GR can
be simply explained by using basic refraction physics, as we have shown, as
their Nobel awarded scientists have obviously confused the effects of
refraction with those of gravitation.
And
then we wonder why cosmology is in a crysis. Because the standard cosmological
model ACDM i.e. big bang theory is entirely based on general relativity and
relativistic redshifts, which do not exist because they are pseudo-science. So
from now on it should be called the standard cosmoillogical model.
The gravitational redshift experiment is
one of the three tests proposed by Einstein to confirm general relativity. He
stated that if any of these tests fails, then his whole theory would collapse
like a house of cards. In this paper I have proved that the g-shift experiment
was fundamentally flawed by the use of helium, and that the refraction from
helium into air produced the redshift- which had nothing to do with Einstein's
theory of gravity. So it’s game over for general relativity.
If gravity ALONE causes light to change wavelenght, why no one can experimentally prove this WITHOUT HELIUM, or similar gases which are present in and around stars ? And why there is no light bending outside the sun’s corona, as Edward Dowdye from NASA has shown ? Apparently, light only bends when there are gases around, isnt that incredible ? Its as if refraction was actually real, and Einsteins space bending theory was fictional.
UPDATE: in this experiment the so called 'gammaray' had an energy of 14.4 keV which corresponds to an Xray; so in fact it was a Xray, not a gammaray (another confusion made by the two relative scientists).
https://tardigrade.in/question/an-electromagnetic-radiation-has-an-energy-14-4-kev-to-which-2x8wwbxp
UPDATE(2):
I have also disproved this experiment using the Compton effect:
https://vasileffect.blogspot.com/2024/06/pound-and-rebka-experiment-is-100.html
Comments
Post a Comment