Frequently Asked Questions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why Light of the Sun is NOT Deflected
by the Gravitational Field
-
Deflection of Light by Gravity is not Compatible with
 the Principle of Mass-Energy  Conservation.
Go to: Next series of questions
Previous series of questions
Return to list of questions
Return to list of papers
 Series FAQ #11 - No Light Deflection by the Sun's Gravitational Field. 
----------------------
Question - (11-A)
How can we show that Light is NOT Deflected by the Gravitational Potential of the Sun?
        There are several reasons.  
        A. - Light cannot be deflected by the Gravitational Field of the Sun, because this is not compatible with the Principle of Mass-Enery Conservation.  This would mean that energy disappears by magic and goes nowhere. 
        B. - Furthermore it is calculated that in relativity, light travels at a slower speed than c in the Sun's gravitational Field.  This is contrary to Einstein's hypothesis of a constant velocity of light  "c" in all frames of reference.
        C. - A Serious Analysis show that experimentally, light deflection by gravity has never been really observed. Light is observed to be deflected by transparent bodies like glass, liquids, and gases (as in air and "unavoidably" in gazeous nebula) due to their index of refraction, but it has never clearly demonstratd that it is deflected by gravity.  
-
Explanation. 
     It is well known that, using General Relativity, Einstein’s predicts that the velocity of light is slower in the gravitational potential near the Sun.  This is not compatible with the previous fundamental principle of a constant velocity of light in vacuum.  It is clearly contradictory to assume that there is an index of refraction larger than unity, near the Sun, in the vacuum of space. This change of velocity is an internal contradiction in General Relativity. 
        There are other serious problems about the hypothesis of light deflection in a gravitational potential predicted by Einstein.  For example, such a deflection of light is not compatible with the principle of mass-energy conservation.  In other words, some energy appears from nothing or disappears into nothing and goes nowhere.  This would be magic.  We do not believe in magic. 
         Let me present a simple proof that the interaction of light in a gravitational field (or its slowing down) is not compatible with the principle of mass-energy conservation.  Let us consider the Pound and Rebka experiment (1).  In that experiment, a nucleus of Fe57 is emitting 14.4 keV Gamma rays, which travel from the bottom to the top of a tower.  It is observed that the Gamma-ray detector at the top of the tower measures a lower frequency.  Einstein’s general relativity explains that this is due to space-time distortion in the Fe57 detector frame, related to its increase of gravitational potential, when moving from the bottom to the top of the tower.  However, Einstein’s general relativity does not predict any absolute change of energy of the photon.  Instead, the apparent change of frequency is due to space-time distortion.  This is generally accepted in general relativity.   
        We have to consider that the energy of photons (Gamma Rays) does not change at all when they are traveling in gravitational fields.  However, this lack of change is not due to space distortion.  In order to measure the energy of photons, we need to use clocks, that are formed of electrons and protons.  We have seen previously that when atoms (therefore clocks) are raised to a higher gravitational energy, the electron orbit (Bohr radius) is changing so that the clock rate is also changing.  This is fundamental in quantum mechanics.  Therefore the clock, which measures the energy of the photons arriving at higher gravitational potential runs at a different rate than the one located at the lower gravitational potential.  This the reason for which the "photon" at a higher gravitational potential "seems" to have more energy than at a lower gravitational potential.  However, we can see that the energy of the photon does not change.  This has been demonstrated in the Book: "Einstein Theory of Relativity versus Classical Mechanics", and other papers.  Therefore the "apparent" change of frequency measured in Pound and Rebka experiment (1) is entirely due to the change of clock rate of the clock at the higher gravitational potential and not due to an assumed "non-realistic" space distortion (that never exists). 
        In the book "Einstein Theory of Relativity versus Classical Mechanics", and other related papers, the basic idea for which we have shown that Newton's laws of physics are always valid in any frame, is based on the fact that when mattter or energy passes from one frame to another frame having a different potential or kinetic energy, this requires necessarily that the observer, with all his measuring tools, made out of matter, must also make the measurement in the new frame.   The fact that the measuring units existing in each frame must change, when carried to new frames has been overlooked in relativity.  However, as seen in the book "Einstein Theory of Relativity versus Classical Mechanics", this is absolutely necessary on order to be compatible with the principle of mass-energy conservation.  
          Surprizingly, this problem is easily solved using fundamental quantum mechanics.  Unfortunately, the fundamental principles of quantum mechanics did not exist when Einstein developed relativity theory.  Using quantum mechanics, we can see that the atomic energy levels and the radius of the Bohr atom are modified so that the observer in a new frame observes a different values that are characteristic of the new size of fundamental units in the new frame.  It becomes obvious that all matter in the new frame is slightly modified including matter forming the body of the observer.  This is the way nature exists.  This is a simple application of the principle of mass-energy conservation.  Consequently, in the Pound and Rebka's experiment, there exists no absolute change of photon energy.  Due to their different location at a different potential, the Gamma detectors possess different sensibility.
        There are more ways to show that light cannot be deflected by a gravitational field.  A correct calculation implies that the proper units inside a frame moving at the velocity of light (photon frame) requires that all clocks are stopped in that frame (moving at the velocity of light).   Therefore no transverse displacement is allowed in zero local (photon) time.  This has been demonstrated in another paper.   Furthermore, it has been shown (*) that this deflection of light has never been seriously measured experimentally. 

        Reference
(1) Pound R. V. and G. A. Rebka, Apparent Weight of Photons, Phys. Rev. Lett., 4, 337 1964. 
See also: Pound R. V. and  Snider, J.L. Effect of gravity on Nuclear Resonance, Phys. Rev. B, 140, 788-803, 1965.

<><><><><><><><><><><><>
New Choice of Questions

---

---

- --

---

<><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Return to top of page
Next Series of Questions
Previous series of questions
 Return to list of questions
 Return to list of papers
 <><><><><><><><><><><><>
space.html              Updated Sept.  1999