SAVING EINSTEIN FROM DOPPLER

When an observer starts moving towards a sound source, the wavefronts start hitting him more frequently, which is obviously caused by the increase in the speed of the waves relative to the observer:

http://faculty.washington.edu/wilkes...erference..pdf
"Sound waves have speed c, and f and L are related by c=Lf. For an observer moving relative to medium with speed u, apparent propagation speed c' will be different: c'=c±u. Wavelength cannot change - it's a constant length in the medium, and same length in moving coordinate system (motion does not change lengths). Observed frequency has to change, to match apparent speed and fixed wavelength: f'=c'/L."

When an observer start moving towards a LIGHT source (with small speed u), again, the wavefronts start hitting him more frequently, the frequency shift obeying exactly the same equation as in the case of sound: f'=(c+u)/L. It seems quite reasonable to conclude that, for light as for sound, the frequency shift is caused by the increase in the speed of the waves relative to the observer:

Stationary observer: http://www.einstein-online.info/imag...ler_static.gif

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bg7O4rtlwEE
"Doppler effect - when an observer moves towards a stationary source. ...the velocity of the wave relative to the observer is faster than that when it is still."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SC0Q6-xt-Xs
"Doppler effect - when an observer moves away from a stationary source. ....the velocity of the wave relative to the observer is slower than that when it is still."

If, even for light, the frequency shift is caused by the increase in the speed of the waves relative to the observer, then Einsteinians should sing "Goodbye Einstein" instead of "Divine Einstein". Einstein needs salvation, but how to save him?

It is not difficult to see that Einstein can only be saved if the observer can somehow change the wavelength of the incoming light (or the distance between subsequent light pulses) - that is, as a result of the motion of the observer, the wavelength must shift from L to L'=cL/(c+u). Or, if "the motion of the observer changes the wavelength of the incoming light" sounds too absurd, the observer should see a change where there is no change - the wavelength of the incoming light has remained unchanged but the observer nevertheless measures a shift from L to L'=cL/(c+u).

Unless Einsteinians find a way to justify the real or apparent shift from L to L'=cL/(c+u) caused by the motion of the observer, "Goodbye Einstein" is much more relevant than "Divine Einstein". So far attempts at justification have only been made by the sci.physics.relativity guru, Tom Roberts:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci....0/1rvrcjF4JlMJ
Tom Roberts: "Wavelength is not an intrinsic property of light, so it cannot be discussed independent of how it is measured. But it is clear that in vacuum the light ray itself is unchanged as it propagates. Differently moving observers will measure different wavelengths for a given light ray, because their MEASURING INSTRUMENTS are oriented differently in spacetime, and such a measurement inherently PROJECTS the light ray onto the measuring instrument."

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci....Y/IDEgAeG6s5kJ
Tom Roberts: "NO NO NO! That's your mistake. The wavelength of ANY wave is NOT the same for all observers, because each observer measures the distance between wavefronts SIMULTANEOUSLY in their own frame, and simultaneity is DIFFERENT in different frames. This is well known, and SOLIDLY established both experimentally and theoretically. But for sound, one does not normally consider observers moving with an appreciable fraction of c (the speed of light), so this effect is negligible for the typical situations that consider sound [#]. But for light, it is NOT negligible, and this effect on wavelength is the same order in V_source/c as the effect on frequency."

Pentcho Valev