In transit gravitational redshift

Hi David, I'm quite happy with the clock on the wall for my need to know the time so designing a new time keeping device is not something I want to kick around. The atom's reaction to force is the important topic so can you tell me where data is that clearly proves the atom slows its natural frequency when force is applied? I see the process as a red shift after the photon is emmitted.

<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,

The atom's reaction to force is the important topic so can you tell me where data is that clearly proves the atom slows its natural frequency when force is applied? I see the process as a red shift after the photon is emmitted.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I guess I got that information from books, papers, and from talking to government physicists at the atomic clock place in Boulder. Call them and ask them if the atomic oscillation rates slow down in a stronger gravity field.

<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,

The atom's reaction to force is the important topic so can you tell me where data is that clearly proves the atom slows its natural frequency when force is applied? I see the process as a red shift after the photon is emmitted.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Jim, take a look at this PDF file:

LINK

See this line on page 2:

“The gravitational frequency shift for NIST-F1, located at an
altitude of about 1600 m above sea level, is [equation].
[10].”

This is the oscillation frequency shift of the atomic material at an elevation of 1600 meters above sea level. This is most often described in books and on physics websites as being a “time dilation” effect. But all it is, is a shift in the oscillation frequency of the atoms in the clock. This is not a real true time “time dilation” for all of time at the elevation of 1600 meters, but it is just a shift in the atomic oscillation rate due to the weaker gravity at that elevation.

If you call the guys at Boulder and talk to their PR department or to some of their physicists, and ask them directly, they will tell you that this represents a frequency shift in the oscillation rates of the atoms inside the clocks. Don’t mention “Einstein”. Don’t mention “relativity”. Just ask them if this does represent an oscillation frequency shift. If you mention Einstein or relativity, some of them will be afraid to tell you the truth about this and they might start talking mumbo-jumbo about “time dilation”.

The Einstein cultists try to control all information that is published about this stuff, and many physicists don’t feel free to write the truth about what is happening inside the clocks, but they will tell you the truth if you ask them in a way that doesn’t seem to be related to the “Einstein” or “relativity” issue.

Jim,

See the section “Clocks in a Gravity Field”:

LINK

The “bunching up” of the light waves can be explained a little more simply. A shorter wavelength observed at a slow speed will appear to be a longer wavelength, and a longer wavelength observed at a faster speed will appear to be a shorter wavelength. So the speed-of-light changes in a photon moving up or down in a gravity well will not affect the observed frequency of the photon. This is just like photons moving through glass or water. Their speeds slow down, their wavelengths “bunch up”, but their observed frequency is not altered.

The reason a valley observer sees a blueshift in mountain-emitted light is because the mountain light is being emitted from the fast oscillating atoms at a higher frequency. The reason a mountain observer sees a redshift in a valley-emitted light is because the valley light is being emitted from the slow oscillating atoms at a lower frequency. The speed-of-light changes from valley to mountain do not alter the emitted or observed frequencies.

Jim,

Here, look at this.....

“The maser is used as described below, in "Active Standards." Atomic frequency standards are so accurate that relativistic effects must be taken into account. For example, a frequency standard 1 km above the surface of the oceans is 1.1 x 1o-~3 higher in frequency than one at sea level due to the change in gravitational potential.”

216.239.57.104/search?q=cache:FtpE6WJUkV...level&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Now, see what Renshaw says about this:

“Now, if we carry our hydrogen atom into the gravitational well, the resulting change in energy will cause the atom to generate and absorb a lower frequency than that which we saw outside the field. However, <b>due to convention</b>, we still use this lower frequency as a definition of 1420 MHz.”

renshaw.teleinc.com/papers/clock2/clock2.stm

What this means is that the oscillation frequency of an atom IS LOWER in a strong gravity field, but this is usually not admitted. I.E. they PRETEND the frequency is NOT lower, and they pretend that “time dilation” takes place in the strong gravity field. But all that happens is that the oscillation FREQUENCY IS LOWER and the emitted frequency of the light is lower.

Can I assume then you are saying the atom is forced to emit photons of a lower frequency when in a stronger gravity field? Not what I say that the effect is after the emition?