Doppler Effect Disproves Einstein's Relativity

Doppler effect - when an observer moves toward a stationary source https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bg7O4rtlwEE

The University of Texas at Austin: "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

This implies that the moving observer sees a different speed of light, in accordance with the formula

(frequency) = (speed of light)/(wavelength)

The University of Texas at Austin would have saved Einstein's relativity if they had written:

"The moving observer sees a wave possessing a different frequency to that seen by the stationary observer, and a wavelength shift inversely proportional to the frequency shift."

See more he https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

Pentcho Valev

John Stachel: "But this seems to be nonsense. How can it happen that the speed of light relative to an observer cannot be increased or decreased if that observer moves towards or away from a light beam? Einstein states that he wrestled with this problem over a lengthy period of time, to the point of despair." http://www.aip.org/history/exhibits/...relativity.htm

Einstein wrestled with his conscience. The reason why the frequency increases for the moving observer https://youtube.com/watch?v=bg7O4rtlwEE is because the speed of the light pulses relative to him increases. No other reason exists. Einsteinians clearly see that the frequency and the speed of the pulses vary proportionally for the moving observer, but believe that only the frequency varies - the speed of the pulses gloriously remains constant. Ignatius of Loyola explains:

"We should always be prepared so as never to err to believe that what I see as white is black, if the hierarchical Church defines it thus."

More he https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

Pentcho Valev

Einstein's 1905 constant-speed-of-light falsehood entails that the wavelength of light varies with the speed of the emitter, which is an obvious absurdity: a fast-moving emitter preposterously chases after any emitted pulse, as is the case for sound waves or light waves in an ether:

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

Variable wavelength of light https://youtube.com/watch?v=xsVxC_NR64M violates the principle of relativity: by measuring the wavelength, inside his spaceship, the emitter would know his speed without looking outside.

Constant wavelength (the truth) entails variable speed of light as per Newton, a variability proved by any relevant experiment:

Wikipedia: "Emission theory, also called emitter theory or ballistic theory of light, was a competing theory for the special theory of relativity, explaining the results of the Michelson–Morley experiment of 1887. [....] The name most often associated with emission theory is Isaac Newton. In his corpuscular theory Newton visualized light "corpuscles" being thrown off from hot bodies at a nominal speed of c with respect to the emitting object, and obeying the usual laws of Newtonian mechanics, and we then expect light to be moving towards us with a speed that is offset by the speed of the distant emitter (c ± v)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emission_theory

John Norton: "The Michelson-Morley experiment is fully compatible with an emission theory of light that CONTRADICTS THE LIGHT POSTULATE." http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/1743/2/Norton.pdf

If there is a next, Einstein-free version of fundamental physics, Einstein's 1905 nonsensical axiom

"The speed of light is constant"

will be replaced with the correct and easily justifiable axiom

"For a given emitter, the wavelength of light is constant".

I have developed the idea in a series of tweets he https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

Pentcho Valev

The formula

(frequency) = (speed of light)/(wavelength)

says that the speed of light is constant as per Einstein

if and only if

ANY frequency shift entails (is caused by) an inversely proportional wavelength shift.

The consequent is obviously false, even absurd (which means that the antecedent, "the speed of light is constant as per Einstein", is false as well):

"...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." https://www.einstein-online.info/en/spotlight/doppler/

"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

"Vo is the velocity of an observer moving towards the source. This velocity is independent of the motion of the source. Hence, the velocity of waves relative to the observer is c + Vo. [...] The motion of an observer does not alter the wavelength. The increase in frequency is a result of the observer encountering more wavelengths in a given time." http://a-levelphysicstutor.com/wav-doppler.php

See https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

Pentcho Valev