Re: Galaxy cluster at z=1.4 challenges BBT

Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote:
>
> Max Keon wrote:
>> Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote:
>>>Max Keon wrote:
-----
-----

>> It would seem that the GR (and yours) interpretation of the Pound
>> and Rebka result is nonsense.
>>
>> Bring one of the GPS clocks back to ground and see if the missing
>> ticks held in limbo between the previously separated clocks suddenly
>> appear. What you are peddling is so obviously wrong that it can only
>> be an embarrassment for the physics community.

>>>
>>>And why do you keep ignoring the *actual* experiment which *has*
>>>been done?

> I'll address the above as soon as you show me that you have actually
> looked up and understood what was done in the Pound-Rebka experiment,
> and explain its *actual* results, instead of the straw men you keep
> bringing up.

If the radioactive iron frequency generator used in the Pound and
Rebka experiment is placed at the tower base, it would naturally
generate photons that were already redshifted compared with the
photons generated from a similar frequency generator located at
the tower top. Neither one will absorb the frequency from the other.
That's what Pound and Rebka found, and that's what GR predicts. But
GR also predicts that the frequency generated at the tower base will
be further redshifted enroute to the tower top because the photons
all lose energy through the climb from the gravity well. That's
the part that can't happen because every oscillation cycle of a
continuous frequency generated at the tower base will relentlessly
pile up between the tower base and tower top because they are
passing by the tower top at a slower rate than they are being
produced (whatever way you want to measure time). And that can go
on indefinitely.

You may be interested in this little excerpt from Britannica.
--
Two-way, round-the-world flights of atomic clocks in 1971 produced
changes in clock epochs that agreed well with the predictions of
special and general relativity. The results have been cited as proof
that the gravitational red shift in the frequency of a photon is
produced when the photon is formed, as predicted by Einstein, and
not later, as the photon moves in a gravitational field. In effect,
gravitational potential is a perturbation that lowers the energy of
a quantum state.
--

I'm sure you would like to know how this all works in the zero
origin universe.

This wavetrain traveling between the tower ends

Tower wave Tower base
top crests <-- constant space --> with earth
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I not present

changes to this when the gravity well set by the earth is included.

Tower wave Tower base
top crests stretching space --> on earth's
I I I I I I I I I surface

At first glance, the wavetrain probably appears redshifted as it
dives into the gravity well, but nothing really changes because the
speed of light has increased along with the stretching space. With
time measured from a fixed point, the wave crests produced per
second in a precision frequency generator placed at each end, will
pass by the other end at exactly the same number of wave crests per
second as they were created. But the frequency generated in the
*stretched space* at the tower base is slower than at the top
because everything to do with generating the frequency is further
apart. Each oscillation cycle now takes longer.

Quite simple isn't it?

> [snip]

>>>>The ratio between
>>>>the radius of the universe relative to the big bang at the time of
>>>>transparency and the current radius should give you some idea of
>>>>the difference in the average gravitational potential then and the
>>>>average potential now.

>>>
>>>The potential is (on average) zero, and always was. If you think
>>>otherwise, you show nicely that you don't understand gravity.

>>
>> There was an enormous concentration of matter then relative to now,

> Right.

>>
>> so there was an enormous gravitational potential then relative to
>> now.

> Wrong. Non sequitur.
>
> The matter was almost homogeneously distributed. In a homogenous
> matter distribution, the gravitational potential is *zero*.

But the gravitational potential between then and now is not zero.
Every potential well is separated through time, so why can't I
compare now with the era when the universe became transparent?
But it really makes no difference whether it's a gravitational
potential well or not because the only thing that matters is that
there was an *enormous* concentration of matter everywhere in the
early big bang universe. A clock tick rate would be slowed
enormously in that environment compared to now.

The magnitude of the effect is summed up in
this extract from my previous post: -------
To bring that all into perspective, the mass of the earth, or
any other constant mass, of any size (it matters not), can be used
to compare how a clock would behave at different stages in the
evolution of the universe from the big bang. The expansion of space
between two points is going to be reasonably uniform throughout the
universe. So by comparing the tick rate of an atomic clock at
different radii from the earth with the tick rate of that clock if
it was fixed at the center of earth's mass, I would get a reasonable
indication of how the clock would behave, on average, anywhere
across the entire universe at any stage of evolution. The changing
relationship between the clock and the earth would be exactly
proportionally to the clock's changing relationship with all of the
matter in the universe.

And so; For the clock at a 13E+9 light year radius (1.23E+20km)
from the earth, (G*M)/(r*c^2)
(6.67E-11*1E+38)/(1.23E+20*300000^2)= 3.6E-20 to 1 per earth clock.
For the clock at, allowing for a very rapid initial expansion, a
whopping 10,000,000 light year radius (9.46E+19km) from the earth
in the environment of the big bang universe at the time when the
universe became transparent,
(6.67E-11*1E+38)/(9.46E+19*300000^2)= 4.7E-17 to 1.
The clock tick ratio between the two stages is
4.7E-17 / 3.6E-20 = 1300 to 1.
The clock was ticking 1300 times slower than it is now, so every
frequency generated in that environment was necessarily 1300 times
slower. The spectrum generated at that time would be that of a 5.5 K
radiator, relative to now. That's before the expansion is even
thought about.

Even if you don't agree with the logic, the effect is certainly
present in rather enormous proportions. The spectrum of the CMBR
was that of a 4000 K blackbody relative to the time rate in the
environment in which it began its journey, but it was nothing like
that of a present day 4000 K blackbody.
-------

-----

Max Keon
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Puny Earthlings, your clocks are too small - Newtons Bucket
    ... instantaneous force, visa vis gravity, and that was what was affecting ... in the universe responsible for the effect, whereby Newton, claimed, ... clock. ... that space-time did exist, although it is invisible. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Galaxy cluster at z=1.4 challenges BBT
    ... >> shifting them apart to the two ends of the tower, ... gravity well in the early universe doesn't change one bit on the ... >> An atomic clock located in the space between e.g. earth sized masses ... separate bundles before gravity can alter time, ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: About time...
    ... with a hypothetical clock which existed when the BB happened, ... 'religious physics ' and you are one of them ... rate of time flow is dependent on gravity and therefore has ... continously changed as the universe expanded. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Galaxy cluster at z=1.4 challenges BBT
    ... >> the tower top. ... i.e. an atomic clock. ... >> GR also predicts that the frequency generated at the tower base will ... >> all lose energy through the climb from the gravity well. ...
    (sci.astro)
  • About time...
    ... with a hypothetical clock which existed when the BB happened, ... In fact, when we say the age of the universe is 13.7 billion years, is ... rate of time flow is dependent on gravity and therefore has ...
    (sci.physics)
Quantcast