DOPPLER LOGIC TOPPLES EINSTEIN

http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/doppler
Albert Einstein Institute: "The frequency of a wave-like signal - such as sound or light - depends on the movement of the sender and of the receiver. This is known as the Doppler effect. (...) Here is an animation of the receiver moving towards the source: (...) 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: As the receiver moves towards each pulse, the time until pulse and receiver meet up is shortened. In this particular animation, which has the receiver moving towards the source at one third the speed of the pulses themselves, four pulses are received in the time it takes the source to emit three pulses."

Premise 1: "The distances between subsequent pulses are not affected."

Premise 2: "Four pulses are received in the time it takes the source to emit three pulses."

Conclusion: The moving receiver (observer) measures the speed of the light pulses to be:

c' = (4/3)c

in violation of special relativity.

The argument is valid - if the premises are true, the conclusion is true as well. In order to save special relativity, Einsteinians will have to prove that at least one of the premises is false.

Pentcho Valev

http://www.hep.man.ac.uk/u/roger/PHY.../lecture18.pdf
Roger Barlow, Professor of Particle Physics: "The Doppler effect - changes in frequencies when sources or observers are in motion - is familiar to anyone who has stood at the roadside and watched (and listened) to the cars go by. It applies to all types of wave, not just sound. (...) Moving Observer. Now suppose the source is fixed but the observer is moving towards the source, with speed v. In time t, ct/lambda waves pass a fixed point. A moving point adds another vt/lambda. So f'=(c+v)/lambda."

That is, the frequency measured by the moving obsrver is:

f' = c'/(lambda)

where c'=c+v is the speed of the light waves relative to the moving observer. Clearly special relativity is violated.

The relativstic corrections change essentially nothing:

Roger Barlow: "If the source is regarded as fixed and the observer is moving, then the observer's clock runs slow. They will measure time intervals as being shorter than they are in the rest frame of the source, and so they will measure frequencies as being higher, again by a gamma factor: f'=(1+v/c)(gamma)f..."

The speed of the light waves relative to the moving observer will also be higher, by a gamma factor:

c' = (lambda)f' = (gamma)(c+v)

Special relativity is even more violated.

Pentcho Valev

The light source starts moving towards the observer with speed v - as a result, the wavecrests start hitting the observer more frequently (the frequency he measures shifts from f=c/L to f'=(c+v)/L, where L is the wavelength). What causes the frequency shift? Two hypotheses are conceivable:

(A) The source is now sending faster light - its speed relative to the observer has shifted from c to c'=c+v.

(B) The source is now sending shorter wavelength - it has shifted from L to L'=cL/(c+v).

Hypothesis A is reasonable (and refutes Einstein's relativity), Hypothesis B is absurd. If the source were sending shorter wavelength, the shift from L to L'=cL/(c+v) would be noticeable to ALL observers, even one comoving with the source. Yet that is not the case - the comoving observer sees no change at all, in perfect accordance with Hypothesis A.

Also, if the source were sending shorter wavelength, the principle of relativity, which requires no difference between "source starts moving towards observer with speed v" and "observer starts moving towards source with speed v" would be violated.

Pentcho Valev

http://www.amazon.com/Brief-History-.../dp/0553380168
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."

That is, the moving source is sending shorter wavelength than when it was stationary? Yes? No? "Yes" is absurd, "no" is reasonable but fatal for Einstein's relativity. (Clever) Einsteinians resort to absolute crimestop in such cases:

http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/o/orwe...hapter2.9.html
"Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are inimical to Ingsoc, and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction. Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity."

Pentcho Valev