The formula (frequency) = (speed of light)/(wavelength) says that a frequency shift entails either a wavelength shift or a speed-of-light shift.

"Any frequency shift entails a wavelength shift" is an implication of Einstein's 1905 axiom "The speed of light is invariable". The implication is obviously absurd - e.g. when the observer (receiver) starts moving towards the light source, the frequency he measures changes but the wavelength (or the distance between the light pulses) remains invariable:

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

The absurdity of the implication means that the underlying axiom, "The speed of light is invariable", is false.

"Any frequency shift entails (is caused by) a speed-of-light shift" is an implication of the axiom "The wavelength of light is invariable". This axiom is correct and will be fundamental in future physics. Here is an equivalent formulation:

Any light source emits INVARIABLE wavelength.

Einsteinians teach that the wavelength VARIES with the speed of the light source:

Stephen Hawking, "A Brief History of Time", Chapter 3: "Now imagine a source of light at a constant distance from us, such as a star, emitting waves of light at a constant wavelength. Obviously the wavelength of the waves we receive will be the same as the wavelength at which they are emitted (the gravitational field of the galaxy will not be large enough to have a significant effect). Suppose now that the source starts moving toward us. When the source emits the next wave crest it will be nearer to us, so the distance between wave crests will be smaller than when the star was stationary." http://www.fisica.net/relatividade/s...ry_of_time.pdf

The idea that the crests bunch up (the wavelength decreases) in front of the moving source is absurd. We have

wavelength = (speed of light as measured by the source)/(frequency as measured by the source)

where (frequency as measured by the source) is obviously independent of the speed of the source. So if the wavelength varied with the speed of the source, then (speed of light as measured by the source) would vary with the speed of the source as well, which is absurd of course.

See Zoe traveling towards Jasper and measuring the speed of light to be always c:

https://newt.phys.unsw.edu.au/einste...eird_logic.htm

By using the same device, Zoe measures the wavelength and finds that it is INVARIABLE (independent of Zoe's speed). This means that Jasper measures the speed of light to be c'=c+v, not c.

The speed of light is VARIABLE, the wavelength is INVARIABLE:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D0U6R1RXgAEbxnQ.png

Pentcho Valev