Well, I will give one more reply. You suggested that light travels at different speeds, using a diagram to show it. Your diagram doesn't show anything of the sort. It is the same thing that Michelson-Morley experiment tested for and it was found that it didn't happen.
This is either a blatant lie, as I suspect it to be, or is indicative of gross ignorance regarding the Michelson-Morley experiment.
In my diagram the light source is ACCELERATING
relatively to the observer!
In the MMX the light source is NOT
accelerating relatively to the observer!
Are you incapable of seeing the difference between those statements?
The MMX was NOT
intended to test the speed of light relatively to an accelerating source but relatively to an assumed aether!
In the MMX all of the equipment including the light source, the mirrors, the interferometer and (assuming that they didn't fidget) any observers were all contained in the same reference frame!
If you measure the speed of light in the frame of reference of the source it will be found to be C. If you measure the speed of light from that source in any other reference frame it will be found to be C.
I have already
pointed out that "If you measure the speed of light in the frame of reference of the source it will be found to be C."
However in my diagram I showed that after a certain period of time as determined by the distant observer the tip of the left hand beam (A) is a greater distance from the source (S) than is the tip of the right hand beam (B).
Are you totally incapable of seeing that, from the point of view of the distant observer, the left hand beam has, in perhaps one second of his time, traveled the distance AS away from the source and in that same period of time the right hand beam has only traveled the shorter distance SB away from the source?
Are you truly incapable of seeing that, from the point of view of the distant observer, the distance AS is greater than the distance SB?
Are you truly incapable of realising that if beam B travels a certain distance in a given period of time whilst beam A travel three times that distance in the same period of time from the point of view of the distant observer that beam A has traveled faster than beam B (from the point of view of the distant observer)?
It should NOT be necessary for me to have to point out that the above diagram IS TOTALLY HYPOTHETICAL! It is nothing more than a thought experiment!
The frequency of the light will be different, but there will be no change in speed. This applies whether the two frames are moving with respect to each other or if they are in locations where the spacetime is warped differently (that is they are in places where the gravitational field is different). Since they are in different reference frames their clocks and other measuring tools will give different results, because of the effects of relativity.
(My underline) That's PRECISELY what I've been saying!!In my accelerating-light-source-diagram the distant observer and the light source ARE IN DIFFERENT REFERENCE FRAMES!!!
In my light-source-adjacent-to-a-black-hole-depiction the far distant observer IS IN A DIFFERENT REFERENCE FRAME THAN THE LOCAL OBSERVER!!!
Ergo (in your words) "Since they are in different reference frames their clocks and other measuring tools will give different results."
As I pointed out in a previous post...the local observer, being located in a different reference frame to the far distant observer, will, as you suggest, determine different results; that's what I SAID!!!
The tools will still be completely accurate in their own reference frame,
It provides you with considerable solace to be able to repeat my arguments without having the decency to acknowledge that they are mine.
it is just that in comparing them between different reference frames they will appear to be different.
They do not merely appear
to be different; they are
different as determined by the results of the Hafele-Keating and Wallops Island experiments.
The predictions of relativity, both SR and GR, have been tested to very high accuracy and they have so far been found to be correct. And in none of the tests has there been found any indication that C changes under any conditions.
One of the 'predictions' of GR was Einstein's comment that the law of the constancy of the speed of light required modification. Has this prediction been found to be correct?
One of Einstein's predictions in 'Relativity' was that the SR law of the constancy pf the velocity of light was not valid when gravitational fields were involved. Has that prediction been found to be correct?
Of course I'm wasting my time asking such questions as you have absolutely no intention whatsoever of answering same.
It is a principle tenet of physics that whilst a theory may appear to have been ratified by numerous experiments it only takes one (repeatable) experiment to invalidate any theory.
If somebody were to design an experiment that determined a variable speed of light in a gravitational field they would be classified as a crackpot as 'everyone knows' that the speed of light is constant in the same way that 'everybody knew' that steel-hulled ships would sink and controlled manned flight was impossible.
If you can't believe that I suggest that you get a good book on relativity and study up on it.
I have, during 28 years of research into relativity, accrued some 50 books on relativity and have read perhaps another 20 at libraries.
This, of course, does not include the many articles I have read in peer-reviewed journals and on the internet.
It was the contradictory arguments presented by the similarly academically qualified authors of such work that sparked my interest in the subject.
I have already informed you that according to Professor Banesh Hoffmann as well as Albert Einstein (both of them authors of good books on relativity) the speed of light is affected by gravity yet you have not had the decency to respond to those references.
Hoffmann wrote (117, 'Albert Einstein', Paladin):-
"Where should [Einstein] look next? At gravitation affecting the speed of light
, since this already transcended the special theory of relativity in which the speed of light was constant and the same for all observers...Why not let the variable speed of light
play the relativistic role...?"
You suggest that I should get a good book on relativity but are apparently of the opinion that Albert Einstein's book 'Relativity, the Special and general Theory' is not suitable reading material.
But of course - the fact that you refused to acknowledge my reference to that book means that as far as you are concerned his opinion does not exist or matter.
My diagram, depicting the varying speed of beams of light relative to a black hole, fully complies with Einstein's comment that a curvature of rays of light can only take place when the speed of light varies depending on its location in a gravitational field
(76, 'Relativity', Crown, 1916).