Chapt15 revisiting Ives & Stilwell experiment to show that Dopplershift of light waves is impossible #439 Atom Totality 4th ed

Honestly, this is the first time I ever heard of the Ives Stilwell
experiment and luckily for me
it appears in detail in Halliday and Resnick PHYSICS part 2, extended
version, 1986, from
pages 929 through 932.

Actually, I was not expecting or anticipating in finding a flaw in
"pure physics" while writing the Atom Totality book.

But I believe I have found and landed on a egregious flaw of pure
physics. I believe it is such a bad flaw that most physicists would be
horribly ashamed by it and to speak of it. I believe the only reason
it is still around in pure physics is because the departure of a
Doppler shift on light would be so devastating towards astronomy, that
the physicists have turned a blind eye to the topic and kept it on,
even though it is false.

What I am speaking of is the Doppler shift on light waves. I believe
there is no such shift. I believe there is a Doppler shift on sound
waves and is easily produced. But due to the specialness of light
waves and special-relativity, I believe that Doppler shift is just not
possible on light.

And the only reason that Halliday and Resnick have a discussion of
Ives and Stilwell experiment on pages 929 through 932 is because the
astronomy community mistakenly thinks they see Doppler redshift of
light when in fact they probably are seeing some thing
of a different phenomenon.

So Halliday and Resnick goes into the Ives and Stilwell experiment in
detail.

I have not yet read it thoroughly and will have to wait to see if I
can pick out the flaw of the
argument. I am confident there is a major flaw, and that light waves
just are not Doppler shifted at all.

My optimism springs from mine own experiment that I can check every
night in my house since I have a sheet of fiberglass plastic window
cover and can look out at the oncoming auto traffic heading eastward
or westward and both of which have a redshift of their headlights or
taillight. So some other physics is what causes the astronomers to see
a redshift, but not a redshift due to motion of that distant lamp.

So how devastating is that to astronomy? That their redshift is not a
Doppler redshift? Well, very devastating.

But the fact remains. I can create an experiment using fiberglass
panels and have a redshift of a lamp coming towards me or a redshift
of a lamp receding.

So that experiment of mine castes doubt that there ever was a Doppler
redshift of light waves, regardless of direction of motion of the lamp
itself.

Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

"Archimedes Plutonium" wrote in message
...
Honestly, this is the first time I ever heard of the Ives Stilwell
experiment and luckily for me
it appears in detail in Halliday and Resnick PHYSICS part 2, extended
version, 1986, from
pages 929 through 932.

Actually, I was not expecting or anticipating in finding a flaw in
"pure physics" while writing the Atom Totality book.

But I believe I have found and landed on a egregious flaw of pure
physics. I believe it is such a bad flaw that most physicists would be
horribly ashamed by it and to speak of it. I believe the only reason
it is still around in pure physics is because the departure of a
Doppler shift on light would be so devastating towards astronomy, that
the physicists have turned a blind eye to the topic and kept it on,
even though it is false.

What I am speaking of is the Doppler shift on light waves. I believe
there is no such shift. I believe there is a Doppler shift on sound
waves and is easily produced. But due to the specialness of light
waves and special-relativity, I believe that Doppler shift is just not
possible on light.

And the only reason that Halliday and Resnick have a discussion of
Ives and Stilwell experiment on pages 929 through 932 is because the
astronomy community mistakenly thinks they see Doppler redshift of
light when in fact they probably are seeing some thing
of a different phenomenon.

So Halliday and Resnick goes into the Ives and Stilwell experiment in
detail.

I have not yet read it thoroughly and will have to wait to see if I
can pick out the flaw of the
argument. I am confident there is a major flaw, and that light waves
just are not Doppler shifted at all.

My optimism springs from mine own experiment that I can check every
night in my house since I have a sheet of fiberglass plastic window
cover and can look out at the oncoming auto traffic heading eastward
or westward and both of which have a redshift of their headlights or
taillight. So some other physics is what causes the astronomers to see
a redshift, but not a redshift due to motion of that distant lamp.

So how devastating is that to astronomy? That their redshift is not a
Doppler redshift? Well, very devastating.

But the fact remains. I can create an experiment using fiberglass
panels and have a redshift of a lamp coming towards me or a redshift
of a lamp receding.

So that experiment of mine castes doubt that there ever was a Doppler
redshift of light waves, regardless of direction of motion of the lamp
itself.

Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

it just doesn't work with fiberglass, that is why they do not have
fiberglass windows in the space shuttle.

On May 20, 8:47*pm, "huhie" wrote:
"Archimedes Plutonium" wrote in message

...



Honestly, this is the first time I ever heard of the Ives Stilwell
experiment and luckily for me
it appears in detail in Halliday and Resnick PHYSICS part 2, extended
version, 1986, from
pages 929 through 932.

Actually, I was not expecting or anticipating in finding a flaw in
"pure physics" while writing the Atom Totality book.

But I believe I have found and landed on a egregious flaw of pure
physics. I believe it is such a bad flaw that most physicists would be
horribly ashamed by it and to speak of it. I believe the only reason
it is still around in pure physics is because the departure of a
Doppler shift on light would be so devastating towards astronomy, that
the physicists have turned a blind eye to the topic and kept it on,
even though it is false.

What I am speaking of is the Doppler shift on light waves. I believe
there is no such shift. I believe there is a Doppler shift on sound
waves and is easily produced. But due to the specialness of light
waves and special-relativity, I believe that Doppler shift is just not
possible on light.

And the only reason that Halliday and Resnick have a discussion of
Ives and Stilwell experiment on pages 929 through 932 is because the
astronomy community mistakenly thinks they see Doppler redshift of
light when in fact they probably are seeing some thing
of a different phenomenon.

So Halliday and Resnick goes into the Ives and Stilwell experiment in
detail.

I have not yet read it thoroughly and will have to wait to see if I
can pick out the flaw of the
argument. I am confident there is a major flaw, and that light waves
just are not Doppler shifted at all.

My optimism springs from mine own experiment that I can check every
night in my house since I have a sheet of fiberglass plastic window
cover and can look out at the oncoming auto traffic heading eastward
or westward and both of which have a redshift of their headlights or
taillight. So some other physics is what causes the astronomers to see
a redshift, but not a redshift due to motion of that distant lamp.

So how devastating is that to astronomy? That their redshift is not a
Doppler redshift? Well, very devastating.

But the fact remains. I can create an experiment using fiberglass
panels and have a redshift of a lamp coming towards me or a redshift
of a lamp receding.

So that experiment of mine castes doubt that there ever was a Doppler
redshift of light waves, regardless of direction of motion of the lamp
itself.

Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

it just doesn't work with fiberglass, that is why they do not have
fiberglass windows in the space shuttle.

At approx 3,000 posts per month you have got to be some computer
response