Kip Thorne (4:56): "If you move toward the source [of light], you see the wavelength shortened, but you don't see the speed changed." https://youtu.be/mvdlN4H4T54?t=296

"The wavelength shortened" is an idiotic fudge factor that preserves the nonsensical constancy of the speed of light and saves Einstein's relativity. Here is more detail:

The observer (receiver) starts moving towards the light source with speed v:

http://www.einstein-online.info/imag...ector_blue.gif

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bg7O4rtlwEE

If you are an Einsteinian and your entire life depends on the nonsensical constancy of the speed of light, you should believe (or pretend to believe, like Kip Thorne) that the motion of the observer changes the distance between incoming pulses - from d to d'=dc/(c+v). Equivalently, you should believe that the motion of the observer changes the wavelength of the incoming light - from λ to λ'=λc/(c+v).

Needless to say, the motion of the observer CANNOT change the wavelength of the incoming light:

"Thus, the moving observer sees a wave possessing the same wavelength [...] but a different frequency [...] to that seen by the stationary observer." http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teachin...ml/node41.html

"By observing the two indicator lights, you can see for yourself that, once more, there is a blue-shift - the pulse frequency measured at the receiver is somewhat higher than the frequency with which the pulses are sent out. This time, the distances between subsequent pulses are not affected, but still there is a frequency shift." http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/doppler.html

"Let's say you, the observer, now move toward the source with velocity Vo. You encounter more waves per unit time than you did before. Relative to you, the waves travel at a higher speed: V' = V+Vo. The frequency of the waves you detect is higher, and is given by: f' = V'/λ = (V+Vo)/λ." http://physics.bu.edu/~redner/211-sp...9_doppler.html

The fudge factor - the motion of the observer changes the wavelength of the incoming light - is too idiotic, even by the standards of Einstein cult, so Einsteinians don't discuss it explicitly. Here are exceptions - Einsteinians who explicitly discuss the idiocy (these Einsteinians are particularly deranged and teach that the motion of the observer changes the wavelength even in the case of sound waves):

http://bretagnemontagne.files.wordpr...2011/02/23.jpg

Professor Martin White, UC Berkeley: "...the sound waves have a fixed wavelength (distance between two crests or two troughs) only if you're not moving relative to the source of the sound. If you are moving away from the source (or equivalently it is receding from you) then each crest will take a little longer to reach you, and so you'll perceive a longer wavelength. Similarly if you're approaching the source, then you'll be meeting each crest a little earlier, and so you'll perceive a shorter wavelength. [...] The same principle applies for light as well as for sound. In detail the amount of shift depends a little differently on the speed, since we have to do the calculation in the context of special relativity. But in general it's just the same: if you're approaching a light source you see shorter wavelengths (a blue-shift), while if you're moving away you see longer wavelengths (a red-shift)." http://w.astro.berkeley.edu/~mwhite/...plershift.html

John Norton: "Every sound or light wave has a particular frequency and wavelength. In sound, they determine the pitch; in light they determine the color. Here's a light wave and an observer. If the observer were to hurry towards the source of the light, the observer would now pass wavecrests more frequently than the resting observer. That would mean that moving observer would find the frequency of the light to have increased (and correspondingly for the wavelength - the distance between crests - to have decreased)." http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teachi...ved/index.html

Pentcho Valev