Hi there Guys. I have quoted my two questions that I asked to return to. Maybe my first does refer to gravitational redshift, but surely the shortened wavelength due to gravity(???this was my question) would rather be a blueshift???Hi JesseM. Thanks for your reply. I think that I am following now. There are two questions that I would like to ask:
• The beam travelling horisontally across the room bends down from the gravity … if it was travelling vertically upwards (directly away from the centre of the large mass) would the wavelength be shortened compared to if the room was further away form the mass? In fact, if we were at (or near) the event horison would the wavelength not be almost infinitely shortened? The observer in the room would not realise it because his ruler would also be shortened? (This is what confused me into thinking that the situation was equivalent to someone travelling at speed trying to measure his shortened wavelength in the direction of travel with his shortened ruler)
• The mass on the trampoline analogy. The implication as I understand it is that a rolling ball would go down the gradient along a line that depended how it approached the depression and at what speed. We are used to seeing geographical maps that show isobars (pressure or height etc). These do not primarily show the path water etc would flow but join points of equal potential. If the trampoline analogy was viewed as layers of iso-potential (gravity or density???) in 3D would the picture not be one of concentric iso-potential spheres around the massive object?
I read the comments about the trampoline analogy and just read about how it depicts time and GR ... sorry guys, I must be blinder than I thought. I need more guidance than that please.