#1
|
|||
|
|||
Arago vs Vogel
I have found the two old measurements:
"In 1818 Arago found that the refraction of a prism for star light was the same for light incident in the direction of the earth's orbital velocity vs. as for that coming in the opposite direction. This unexpected null result was explained that same year by Fresnel's ether-dray theory, which assumed partial ether entrainment in transparent media by an amount depending upon the first power of v." From: http://www.3rd1000.com/chronoatoms.htm And: 2. Vogel, H. C., "On the spectrographic method of determining the velocity of stars in the line of sight", Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. 52, p.87, 1891 "The first result of any importance which the spectrographic method furnished was the proof of the influence of the Earth's motion on the displacement, which the earlier direct observations had failed to show with certainity. [...]" From: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1891MNRAS..52...87V Who was right: Arago or Vogel? S* |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Arago vs Vogel
On 22/10/2011 07:50, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
I have found the two old measurements: "In 1818 Arago found that the refraction of a prism for star light was the same for light incident in the direction of the earth's orbital velocity vs. as for that coming in the opposite direction. This unexpected null result was explained that same year by Fresnel's ether-dray theory, which assumed partial ether entrainment in transparent media by an amount depending upon the first power of v." From: http://www.3rd1000.com/chronoatoms.htm And: 2. Vogel, H. C., "On the spectrographic method of determining the velocity of stars in the line of sight", Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. 52, p.87, 1891 "The first result of any importance which the spectrographic method furnished was the proof of the influence of the Earth's motion on the displacement, which the earlier direct observations had failed to show with certainity. [...]" From: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1891MNRAS..52...87V Who was right: Arago or Vogel? S* I would suggest they both were. Since starlight comprises a continuum crossed by spectral lines, it's possible for the refraction of light through the prism to be unchanged whilst the position of the spectral lines varies against the continuum. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Arago vs Vogel
Uzytkownik "OG" napisal w wiadomosci ... On 22/10/2011 07:50, Szczepan Bialek wrote: I have found the two old measurements: "In 1818 Arago found that the refraction of a prism for star light was the same for light incident in the direction of the earth's orbital velocity vs. as for that coming in the opposite direction. This unexpected null result was explained that same year by Fresnel's ether-dray theory, which assumed partial ether entrainment in transparent media by an amount depending upon the first power of v." From: http://www.3rd1000.com/chronoatoms.htm And: 2. Vogel, H. C., "On the spectrographic method of determining the velocity of stars in the line of sight", Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. 52, p.87, 1891 "The first result of any importance which the spectrographic method furnished was the proof of the influence of the Earth's motion on the displacement, which the earlier direct observations had failed to show with certainity. [...]" From: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1891MNRAS..52...87V Who was right: Arago or Vogel? S* I would suggest they both were. Since starlight comprises a continuum crossed by spectral lines, it's possible for the refraction of light through the prism to be unchanged whilst the position of the spectral lines varies against the continuum. It is known that the spectroscopic methods and the spectrographic methods are not accurate. But now are the spacecrafts like Voyager and Pionier. They transmit the single frequency. So it is easy to detect any changes in frequency (The diurinal and annual). Are the result known? S* |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Arago vs Vogel
On 25/10/2011 08:32, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
Uzytkownik napisal w wiadomosci ... On 22/10/2011 07:50, Szczepan Bialek wrote: I have found the two old measurements: "In 1818 Arago found that the refraction of a prism for star light was the same for light incident in the direction of the earth's orbital velocity vs. as for that coming in the opposite direction. This unexpected null result was explained that same year by Fresnel's ether-dray theory, which assumed partial ether entrainment in transparent media by an amount depending upon the first power of v." From: http://www.3rd1000.com/chronoatoms.htm And: 2. Vogel, H. C., "On the spectrographic method of determining the velocity of stars in the line of sight", Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. 52, p.87, 1891 "The first result of any importance which the spectrographic method furnished was the proof of the influence of the Earth's motion on the displacement, which the earlier direct observations had failed to show with certainity. [...]" From: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1891MNRAS..52...87V Who was right: Arago or Vogel? S* I would suggest they both were. Since starlight comprises a continuum crossed by spectral lines, it's possible for the refraction of light through the prism to be unchanged whilst the position of the spectral lines varies against the continuum. It is known that the spectroscopic methods and the spectrographic methods are not accurate. What level of accuracy are you looking for? for bright stars it's possible to measure speeds to several 10s of m/s But now are the spacecrafts like Voyager and Pionier. They transmit the single frequency. So it is easy to detect any changes in frequency (The diurinal and annual). Are the result known? I'm sure you could find something if you searched. What are you expecting? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Arago vs Vogel
"OG" napisal w wiadomosci ... On 25/10/2011 08:32, Szczepan Bialek wrote: Uzytkownik napisal w wiadomosci ... On 22/10/2011 07:50, Szczepan Bialek wrote: I have found the two old measurements: "In 1818 Arago found that the refraction of a prism for star light was the same for light incident in the direction of the earth's orbital velocity vs. as for that coming in the opposite direction. This unexpected null result was explained that same year by Fresnel's ether-dray theory, which assumed partial ether entrainment in transparent media by an amount depending upon the first power of v." From: http://www.3rd1000.com/chronoatoms.htm And: 2. Vogel, H. C., "On the spectrographic method of determining the velocity of stars in the line of sight", Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. 52, p.87, 1891 "The first result of any importance which the spectrographic method furnished was the proof of the influence of the Earth's motion on the displacement, which the earlier direct observations had failed to show with certainity. [...]" From: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1891MNRAS..52...87V Who was right: Arago or Vogel? S* I would suggest they both were. Since starlight comprises a continuum crossed by spectral lines, it's possible for the refraction of light through the prism to be unchanged whilst the position of the spectral lines varies against the continuum. It is known that the spectroscopic methods and the spectrographic methods are not accurate. What level of accuracy are you looking for? for bright stars it's possible to measure speeds to several 10s of m/s Yes. But I know that there are the diurinal effects and do not know about the annual. "As a result of the Earth's orbital motion about the Sun and the rotation of the observer about the Earth's axis the solar spectral lines are Doppler shifted relative to terrestrial standards. Both effects give rise to Doppler amplitudes of the order of 0.5km/s. This effect has, in the past been overlooked, with one Eastern-block group "discovering" a diurnal shift in the Telluric O2 lines by comparing them with nearby photospheric lines (which were taken as wavelength standards) ! See I.Vince, Publ. Astron. Obs. Belgrade 26, p.167 (1978) for the expose. " From: http://solar-center.stanford.edu/FAQ/Qabsorption.html But now are the spacecrafts like Voyager and Pionier. They transmit the single frequency. So it is easy to detect any changes in frequency (The diurinal and annual). Are the result known? I'm sure you could find something if you searched. What are you expecting? An answer for the question: " Who was right: Arago or Vogel? Your answer: "I would suggest they both were" is like the next duality. The Arago null result is the base for the physics: "This unexpected null result was explained that same year by Fresnel's ether-dray theory". It seems to me that Vogel was wrong. Searching failed. Today's astronomers know the exact result and do not write about this because it is obvious for them. I am not an astronomer so I am asking. S* |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Arago vs Vogel
On 26/10/2011 09:15, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
napisal w wiadomosci ... On 25/10/2011 08:32, Szczepan Bialek wrote: Uzytkownik napisal w wiadomosci ... On 22/10/2011 07:50, Szczepan Bialek wrote: I have found the two old measurements: "In 1818 Arago found that the refraction of a prism for star light was the same for light incident in the direction of the earth's orbital velocity vs. as for that coming in the opposite direction. This unexpected null result was explained that same year by Fresnel's ether-dray theory, which assumed partial ether entrainment in transparent media by an amount depending upon the first power of v." From: http://www.3rd1000.com/chronoatoms.htm And: 2. Vogel, H. C., "On the spectrographic method of determining the velocity of stars in the line of sight", Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. 52, p.87, 1891 "The first result of any importance which the spectrographic method furnished was the proof of the influence of the Earth's motion on the displacement, which the earlier direct observations had failed to show with certainity. [...]" From: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1891MNRAS..52...87V Who was right: Arago or Vogel? S* I would suggest they both were. Since starlight comprises a continuum crossed by spectral lines, it's possible for the refraction of light through the prism to be unchanged whilst the position of the spectral lines varies against the continuum. It is known that the spectroscopic methods and the spectrographic methods are not accurate. What level of accuracy are you looking for? for bright stars it's possible to measure speeds to several 10s of m/s Yes. But I know that there are the diurinal effects and do not know about the annual. "As a result of the Earth's orbital motion about the Sun and the rotation of the observer about the Earth's axis the solar spectral lines are Doppler shifted relative to terrestrial standards. Both effects give rise to Doppler amplitudes of the order of 0.5km/s. Yes, the rotation of the Earth means that at the equator at Sunrise the observer is hurtling towards the sun at about 1600km/h, and at sunset the observer is speeding away at about 1600km/h. At other latitudes th this is less. In addition, the shape of the earth's elliptical orbit means that between January (perihelion) and July (aphelion) the Earth gets about 5 million km further away from the Sun, with the separation reducing in the following 6 months This effect has, in the past been overlooked, with one Eastern-block group "discovering" a diurnal shift in the Telluric O2 lines by comparing them with nearby photospheric lines (which were taken as wavelength standards) ! See I.Vince, Publ. Astron. Obs. Belgrade 26, p.167 (1978) for the expose. " From: http://solar-center.stanford.edu/FAQ/Qabsorption.html The Telluric O2 lines are those that are produced by O2 in the Earth's atmosphere. It seems likely that that 'Eastern block group' had measured their frequency using solar lines as reference wavelengths. Being unaware that there was *a diurnal variation in the solar lines*, they interpreted their results as showing that the *Earth's atmospheric lines* were changing through the day. But now are the spacecrafts like Voyager and Pionier. They transmit the single frequency. So it is easy to detect any changes in frequency (The diurinal and annual). Are the result known? I'm sure you could find something if you searched. What are you expecting? An answer for the question: " Who was right: Arago or Vogel? Your answer: "I would suggest they both were" is like the next duality. The Arago null result is the base for the physics: "This unexpected null result was explained that same year by Fresnel's ether-dray theory". It was previously thought that the angle of displacement of light through a prism would be dependent on the speed with which light impacted on the prism. The constancy of the displacement angle pointed to a constancy of the speed of light; and in the era before special relativity, it was suggested that the aether was 'dragged' along with the Earth. It seems to me that Vogel was wrong. In what way do you think he was wrong? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Arago vs Vogel
"OG" napisal w wiadomosci ... On 26/10/2011 09:15, Szczepan Bialek wrote: napisal w wiadomosci ... On 25/10/2011 08:32, Szczepan Bialek wrote: Uzytkownik napisal w wiadomosci ... On 22/10/2011 07:50, Szczepan Bialek wrote: I have found the two old measurements: "In 1818 Arago found that the refraction of a prism for star light was the same for light incident in the direction of the earth's orbital velocity vs. as for that coming in the opposite direction. This unexpected null result was explained that same year by Fresnel's ether-dray theory, which assumed partial ether entrainment in transparent media by an amount depending upon the first power of v." From: http://www.3rd1000.com/chronoatoms.htm And: 2. Vogel, H. C., "On the spectrographic method of determining the velocity of stars in the line of sight", Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. 52, p.87, 1891 "The first result of any importance which the spectrographic method furnished was the proof of the influence of the Earth's motion on the displacement, which the earlier direct observations had failed to show with certainity. [...]" From: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1891MNRAS..52...87V Who was right: Arago or Vogel? S* I would suggest they both were. Since starlight comprises a continuum crossed by spectral lines, it's possible for the refraction of light through the prism to be unchanged whilst the position of the spectral lines varies against the continuum. It is known that the spectroscopic methods and the spectrographic methods are not accurate. What level of accuracy are you looking for? for bright stars it's possible to measure speeds to several 10s of m/s Yes. But I know that there are the diurinal effects and do not know about the annual. "As a result of the Earth's orbital motion about the Sun and the rotation of the observer about the Earth's axis the solar spectral lines are Doppler shifted relative to terrestrial standards. Both effects give rise to Doppler amplitudes of the order of 0.5km/s. Yes, the rotation of the Earth means that at the equator at Sunrise the observer is hurtling towards the sun at about 1600km/h, and at sunset the observer is speeding away at about 1600km/h. At other latitudes th this is less. In addition, the shape of the earth's elliptical orbit means that between January (perihelion) and July (aphelion) the Earth gets about 5 million km further away from the Sun, with the separation reducing in the following 6 months This effect has, in the past been overlooked, with one Eastern-block group "discovering" a diurnal shift in the Telluric O2 lines by comparing them with nearby photospheric lines (which were taken as wavelength standards) ! See I.Vince, Publ. Astron. Obs. Belgrade 26, p.167 (1978) for the expose. " From: http://solar-center.stanford.edu/FAQ/Qabsorption.html The Telluric O2 lines are those that are produced by O2 in the Earth's atmosphere. It seems likely that that 'Eastern block group' had measured their frequency using solar lines as reference wavelengths. Being unaware that there was *a diurnal variation in the solar lines*, they interpreted their results as showing that the *Earth's atmospheric lines* were changing through the day. But now are the spacecrafts like Voyager and Pionier. They transmit the single frequency. So it is easy to detect any changes in frequency (The diurinal and annual). Are the result known? I'm sure you could find something if you searched. What are you expecting? An answer for the question: " Who was right: Arago or Vogel? Your answer: "I would suggest they both were" is like the next duality. The Arago null result is the base for the physics: "This unexpected null result was explained that same year by Fresnel's ether-dray theory". It was previously thought that the angle of displacement of light through a prism would be dependent on the speed with which light impacted on the prism. The constancy of the displacement angle pointed to a constancy of the speed of light; and in the era before special relativity, it was suggested that the aether was 'dragged' along with the Earth. In that time were many the null result. Arago, Michelson-Morley, Trouton-Noble and the others. I have never seen in textbooks the Vogel result. But it is in Wiki without any comments:" "The first Doppler redshift was described in 1848 by French physicist Hippolyte Fizeau, who pointed to the shift in spectral lines seen in stars as being due to the Doppler effect. The effect is sometimes called the "Doppler-Fizeau effect". In 1868, British astronomer William Huggins was the first to determine the velocity of a star moving away from the Earth by this method.[7] In 1871, optical redshift was confirmed when the phenomenon was observed in Fraunhofer lines using solar rotation, about 0.1 Å in the red.[8] In 1887, Vogel and Scheiner discovered the annual Doppler effect, the yearly change in the Doppler shift of stars located near the ecliptic due to the orbital velocity of the Earth.[9] In 1901, Aristarkh Belopolsky verified optical redshift in the laboratory using a system of rotating mirrors.[10]" From: ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshifts It seems to me that Vogel was wrong. In what way do you think he was wrong? The Arago result is in agreement with the , Michelson-Morley, Trouton-Noble and the others. The "diurinal effect" is in agreement with the , Michelson-Gale experiment. So the: " "The first result of any importance which the spectrographic method furnished was the proof of the influence of the Earth's annual motion on the displacement, which the earlier direct observations had failed to show." was probably verified by many others. Also with the radio waves. S* |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Arago vs Vogel
On 27/10/2011 09:07, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
napisal w wiadomosci ... On 26/10/2011 09:15, Szczepan Bialek wrote: napisal w wiadomosci ... On 25/10/2011 08:32, Szczepan Bialek wrote: Uzytkownik napisal w wiadomosci ... On 22/10/2011 07:50, Szczepan Bialek wrote: I have found the two old measurements: "In 1818 Arago found that the refraction of a prism for star light was the same for light incident in the direction of the earth's orbital velocity vs. as for that coming in the opposite direction. This unexpected null result was explained that same year by Fresnel's ether-dray theory, which assumed partial ether entrainment in transparent media by an amount depending upon the first power of v." From: http://www.3rd1000.com/chronoatoms.htm And: 2. Vogel, H. C., "On the spectrographic method of determining the velocity of stars in the line of sight", Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. 52, p.87, 1891 "The first result of any importance which the spectrographic method furnished was the proof of the influence of the Earth's motion on the displacement, which the earlier direct observations had failed to show with certainity. [...]" From: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1891MNRAS..52...87V Who was right: Arago or Vogel? S* I would suggest they both were. Since starlight comprises a continuum crossed by spectral lines, it's possible for the refraction of light through the prism to be unchanged whilst the position of the spectral lines varies against the continuum. It is known that the spectroscopic methods and the spectrographic methods are not accurate. What level of accuracy are you looking for? for bright stars it's possible to measure speeds to several 10s of m/s Yes. But I know that there are the diurinal effects and do not know about the annual. "As a result of the Earth's orbital motion about the Sun and the rotation of the observer about the Earth's axis the solar spectral lines are Doppler shifted relative to terrestrial standards. Both effects give rise to Doppler amplitudes of the order of 0.5km/s. Yes, the rotation of the Earth means that at the equator at Sunrise the observer is hurtling towards the sun at about 1600km/h, and at sunset the observer is speeding away at about 1600km/h. At other latitudes th this is less. In addition, the shape of the earth's elliptical orbit means that between January (perihelion) and July (aphelion) the Earth gets about 5 million km further away from the Sun, with the separation reducing in the following 6 months This effect has, in the past been overlooked, with one Eastern-block group "discovering" a diurnal shift in the Telluric O2 lines by comparing them with nearby photospheric lines (which were taken as wavelength standards) ! See I.Vince, Publ. Astron. Obs. Belgrade 26, p.167 (1978) for the expose. " From: http://solar-center.stanford.edu/FAQ/Qabsorption.html The Telluric O2 lines are those that are produced by O2 in the Earth's atmosphere. It seems likely that that 'Eastern block group' had measured their frequency using solar lines as reference wavelengths. Being unaware that there was *a diurnal variation in the solar lines*, they interpreted their results as showing that the *Earth's atmospheric lines* were changing through the day. But now are the spacecrafts like Voyager and Pionier. They transmit the single frequency. So it is easy to detect any changes in frequency (The diurinal and annual). Are the result known? I'm sure you could find something if you searched. What are you expecting? An answer for the question: " Who was right: Arago or Vogel? Your answer: "I would suggest they both were" is like the next duality. The Arago null result is the base for the physics: "This unexpected null result was explained that same year by Fresnel's ether-dray theory". It was previously thought that the angle of displacement of light through a prism would be dependent on the speed with which light impacted on the prism. The constancy of the displacement angle pointed to a constancy of the speed of light; and in the era before special relativity, it was suggested that the aether was 'dragged' along with the Earth. In that time were many the null result. Arago, Michelson-Morley, Trouton-Noble and the others. I have never seen in textbooks the Vogel result. But it is in Wiki without any comments:" "The first Doppler redshift was described in 1848 by French physicist Hippolyte Fizeau, who pointed to the shift in spectral lines seen in stars as being due to the Doppler effect. The effect is sometimes called the "Doppler-Fizeau effect". In 1868, British astronomer William Huggins was the first to determine the velocity of a star moving away from the Earth by this method.[7] In 1871, optical redshift was confirmed when the phenomenon was observed in Fraunhofer lines using solar rotation, about 0.1 Å in the red.[8] In 1887, Vogel and Scheiner discovered the annual Doppler effect, the yearly change in the Doppler shift of stars located near the ecliptic due to the orbital velocity of the Earth.[9] In 1901, Aristarkh Belopolsky verified optical redshift in the laboratory using a system of rotating mirrors.[10]" From: ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshifts It seems to me that Vogel was wrong. In what way do you think he was wrong? The Arago result is in agreement with the , Michelson-Morley, Trouton-Noble and the others. The "diurinal effect" is in agreement with the , Michelson-Gale experiment. So the: " "The first result of any importance which the spectrographic method furnished was the proof of the influence of the Earth's annual motion on the displacement, which the earlier direct observations had failed to show." was probably verified by many others. Also with the radio waves. S* I'm sorry, but I still don't see what point you're making. You can't detect any diurnal/annual change to the speed of light by the Earth's motion, but you can detect a diurnal/annual effect by using spectroscopy. The two experiments are doing different things and the results are completely compatible. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Arago vs Vogel
On Oct 27, 10:07*am, "Szczepan Bialek" wrote:
*"OG" napisal w ... On 26/10/2011 09:15, Szczepan Bialek wrote: * *napisal w wiadomosci ... On 25/10/2011 08:32, Szczepan Bialek wrote: Uzytkownik * napisal w wiadomosci ... On 22/10/2011 07:50, Szczepan Bialek wrote: I have found the two old measurements: "In 1818 Arago found that the refraction of a prism for star light was the same for light incident in the direction of the earth's orbital velocity vs. as for that coming in the opposite direction. This unexpected null result was explained that same year by Fresnel's ether-dray theory, which assumed partial ether entrainment in transparent media by an amount depending upon the first power of v." From: *http://www.3rd1000.com/chronoatoms..htm And: 2. Vogel, H. C., "On the spectrographic method of determining the velocity of * * stars in the line of sight", Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical * * Society, Vol. 52, p.87, 1891 * * "The first result of any importance which the spectrographic method * * furnished was the proof of the influence of the Earth's motion on the * * displacement, which the earlier direct observations had failed to show * * with certainity. [...]" From: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1891MNRAS..52...87V Who was right: Arago or Vogel? S* I would suggest they both were. Since starlight comprises a continuum crossed by spectral lines, it's possible for the refraction of light through the prism to be unchanged whilst the position of the spectral lines varies against the continuum. It is known that the spectroscopic methods and the spectrographic methods are not accurate. What level of accuracy are you looking for? for bright stars it's possible to measure speeds to several 10s of m/s Yes. But I know that there are the diurinal effects and do not know about the annual. "As a result of the Earth's orbital motion about the Sun and the rotation of the observer about the Earth's axis the solar spectral lines are Doppler shifted relative to terrestrial standards. Both effects give rise to Doppler amplitudes of the order of 0.5km/s. Yes, the rotation of the Earth means that at the equator at Sunrise the observer is hurtling towards the sun at about 1600km/h, and at sunset the observer is speeding away at about 1600km/h. At other latitudes th this is less. In addition, the shape of the earth's elliptical orbit means that between January (perihelion) and July (aphelion) the Earth gets about 5 million km further away from the Sun, with the separation reducing in the following 6 months This effect has, in the past been overlooked, with one Eastern-block group "discovering" a diurnal shift in the Telluric O2 lines by comparing them with nearby photospheric lines (which were taken as wavelength standards) ! See I.Vince, Publ. Astron. Obs. Belgrade 26, p.167 (1978) for the expose. " From: *http://solar-center.stanford.edu/FAQ/Qabsorption.html The Telluric O2 lines are those that are produced by O2 in the Earth's atmosphere. It seems likely that that 'Eastern block group' had measured their frequency using solar lines as reference wavelengths. Being unaware that there was *a diurnal variation in the solar lines*, they interpreted their results as showing that the *Earth's atmospheric lines* were changing through the day. But now are the spacecrafts like Voyager and Pionier. They transmit the single frequency. So it is easy to detect any changes in frequency (The diurinal and annual). Are the result known? I'm sure you could find something if you searched. What are you expecting? An answer for the question: " Who was right: Arago or Vogel? Your answer: *"I would suggest they both were" is like the next duality. The Arago null result is the base for the physics: "This unexpected null result was explained that same year by Fresnel's ether-dray theory". It was previously thought that the angle of displacement of light through a prism would be dependent on the speed with which light impacted on the prism. The constancy of the displacement angle pointed to a constancy of the speed of light; and in the era before special relativity, it was suggested that the aether was 'dragged' along with the Earth. In that time were many the null result. Arago, Michelson-Morley, Trouton-Noble and the others. I have never seen in textbooks the Vogel result. But it is in Wiki without any comments:" "The first Doppler redshift was described in 1848 by French physicist Hippolyte Fizeau, who pointed to the shift in spectral lines seen in stars as being due to the Doppler effect. The effect is sometimes called the "Doppler-Fizeau effect". In 1868, British astronomer William Huggins was the first to determine the velocity of a star moving away from the Earth by this method.[7] In 1871, optical redshift was confirmed when the phenomenon was observed in Fraunhofer lines using solar rotation, about 0.1 Å in the red.[8] In 1887, Vogel and Scheiner discovered the annual Doppler effect, the yearly change in the Doppler shift of stars located near the ecliptic due to the orbital velocity of the Earth.[9] In 1901, Aristarkh Belopolsky verified optical redshift in the laboratory using a system of rotating mirrors.[10]" From: ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshifts It seems to me that Vogel was wrong. In what way do you think he was wrong? The Arago result is in agreement with the , Michelson-Morley, Trouton-Noble and the others. The "diurinal effect" is *in agreement with the , Michelson-Gale experiment. So the: " "The first result of any importance which the spectrographic method furnished was the proof of the influence of the Earth's annual motion on *the *displacement, which the earlier direct observations had failed to show." was probably verified by many others. Also with the radio waves. S* I have never encountered a people like the Polish,they have Copernicus who argued for the daily and orbital motions of the Earth and specifically showing that retrogrades motions are an illusion seen from an orbital motion of the Earth - http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap011220.html You are among people that follow Newton who decided all by himself to arrive at an alternative solution to retrogrades by inventing a hypothetical observer on the Sun - "For to the earth planetary motions appear sometimes direct, sometimes stationary, nay, and sometimes retrograde. But from the sun they are always seen direct,..." Newton I truly enjoy what your countryman did back 500 years ago in 1512 ,he had a commennt for people who couldn't handle observations properly and empiricists fill that specific role today - ".. although they have extracted from them the apparent motions, with numerical agreement, nevertheless . . . . They are just like someone including in a picture hands, feet, head, and other limbs from different places, well painted indeed, but not modeled from the same body, and not in the least matching each other, so that a monster would be produced from them rather than a man. Thus in the process of their demonstrations, which they call their system, they are found either to have missed out something essential, or to have brought in something inappropriate and wholly irrelevant, which would not have happened to them if they had followed proper principles." Copernicus Your nation gets to partake in a second holocaust within the space of a century and this one where the intellectual foundations for a civilization no longer exist,at least where science is concerned.Congratulations !,If I could feel more dismay for the way the great astronomical insights were distorted and manipulated,and especially that of Copernicus, I wouldn't know how. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Arago vs Vogel
"OG" napisal w wiadomosci ... On 27/10/2011 09:07, Szczepan Bialek wrote: So the: " "The first result of any importance which the spectrographic method furnished was the proof of the influence of the Earth's annual motion on the displacement, which the earlier direct observations had failed to show." was probably verified by many others. Also with the radio waves. S* I'm sorry, but I still don't see what point you're making. You can't detect any diurnal/annual change to the speed of light by the Earth's motion, The diurinal was detected by Michelson-Gale in 1925 and is prectised in GPS. but you can detect a diurnal/annual effect by using spectroscopy. The annual was detected by Vogel and I do not know who use it. The two experiments are doing different things and the results are completely compatible. The Arago result of spectroscopy is compatible with Michelson-Morley and Michelson-Gale. The Vogel's result do not fit to them. S* |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|