On Mar 28, 7:50 am, PD wrote:
On Mar 27, 11:28 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:

It should be very clear at this stage the Doppler shift no matter how
you fudge it to be should agree with the energy transform as described
below.

** f’ / f = (1 + [v] * [c]) / sqrt(1 – v^2 / c^2)

Where

** [v] = Velocity vector between frames of f and f’
** [c] = Velocity vector of light
** [] * [] = dot product of two vectors

Under the transverse case,

** f’ / f = 1 / sqrt(1 – v^2 / c^2)

Where

** [v] * [c] = 0

This means SR predicts a blue Doppler shift in the transverse
direction, and that is totally wrong. shrug

Anyone with half a brain would attempt to execute a graceful
retreat from that. shrug

It smells like a bunch of sour ass losers with unsportsmanlike
conducts. shrug

The bottom line is that SR does not produce what is observed in
experiments. Thus, SR is merely garbage. Just how difficult can
that be? shrug

So, just to recap, what you are saying is that, in your view, the
Doppler shift should agree with the derivation that YOU produced and
which does NOT agree with experiment, and that on the basis of this
result, relativity should be found fault with.

OK, let’s do a recap. Are the following equations valid under the
Lorentz transform and SR?

** f’ / f = (1 + [v] * [c]) / sqrt(1 – v^2 / c^2)

Where

** [v] = Velocity vector between frames of f and f’
** [c] = Velocity vector of light
** [] * [] = dot product of two vectors

Under the transverse case,

** f’ / f = 1 / sqrt(1 – v^2 / c^2)

Where

** [v] * [c] = 0

If the answer is yes, WTF is the problem? shrug

If the answer is no, what do you think is the correct equation
describing the transverse Doppler shift under SR?