A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS REFUTES EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 6th 14, 09:48 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS REFUTES EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY

http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teachin...ml/node41.html
University of Texas: "Thus, the moving observer sees a wave possessing the same wavelength (...) but a different frequency (...) to that seen by the stationary observer. This phenomenon is known as the Doppler effect."

That is, in accordance with the formula

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

the speed of light waves (relative to the observer) varies with the speed of the observer, in violation of special relativity:

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."

Pentcho Valev
  #2  
Old August 7th 14, 07:39 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS REFUTES EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY

Any reasonable interpretation of the Doppler frequency shift leads to the conclusion that the speed of light relative to the observer (receiver) varies with the speed of the observer (receiver), in violation of special relativity:

http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/doppler
Albert Einstein Institute: "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."

The speed of the light pulses relative to the stationary receiver is:

c = d/t

where d is the distance between subsequent pulses and t is the time until pulse and (stationary) receiver meet up. For the moving receiver, "the time until pulse and receiver meet up is shortened". This means that the speed of the pulses relative to the moving receiver is:

c' = d/t' = c + v

where t' is the time until pulse and moving receiver meet up (tt') and v is the speed of the receiver relative to the source.

Pentcho Valev
  #3  
Old August 7th 14, 12:28 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS REFUTES EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY

Yes, any reasonable interpretation of the Doppler frequency shift leads to the conclusion that the speed of light (relative to the observer) varies with the speed of the observer, in violation of special relativity:

http://researcher.nsc.gov.tw/public/...1016202571.pdf
Fang-Yuh Lo, Department of Physics, National Taiwan Normal University: "Observer moves toward source: frequency becomes higher. Observer moves away from source: frequency becomes lower. How much higher (lower)? Wavelength does not change. Change in velocity: Vnew=Vwave±Vobs. (...) Examples: sirens of a traveling vehicle; speed radar of police; red shift in light - astronomical observation."

That is, if the observer starts moving towards the light source with (small) speed v, the speed of the light relative to him shifts from c to c'=c+v, and this shift causes the frequency measured by him to shift from f=c/L to f'=c'/L, where L is the wavelength:

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."

Pentcho Valev
  #4  
Old August 8th 14, 10:57 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS REFUTES EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY

A light source emits a series of pulses the distance between which is d (e.g. d=300000km). A stationary receiver/observer measures the frequency of the pulses to be f=c/d:

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

The receiver starts moving with (small) speed v towards the light source - the measured frequency shifts from f=c/d to f'=(c+v)/d:

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

Why does the frequency shift from f=c/d to f'=(c+v)/d ?

Answer 1 (if true, modern physics collapses): Because the speed of the pulses relative to the receiver shifts from c to c'=c+v.

http://www.amazon.com/Faster-Than-Sp.../dp/0738205257
Faster Than the Speed of Light, Joao Magueijo: "If there's one thing every schoolboy knows about Einstein and his theory of relativity, it is that the speed of light in vacuum is constant. No matter what the circumstances, light in vacuum travels at the same speed - a constant that physicists denote by the letter c: 300,000 km per second, or as Americans refer to it, 186,000 miles per second. The speed of light is the very keystone of physics, the seemingly sure foundation upon which every modern cosmological theory is built, the yardstick by which everything in the universe is measured. (...) The only aspect of the universe that didn't change was the speed of light.. And ever since, the constancy of the speed of light has been woven into the very fabric of physics, into the way physics equations are written, even into the notation used. Nowadays, to "vary" the speed of light is not even a swear word: It is simply not present in the vocabulary of physics."

http://www.kritik-relativitaetstheor...-of-physics-2/
Bryan Wallace: "Einstein's special relativity theory with his second postulate that the speed of light in space is constant is the linchpin that holds the whole range of modern physics theories together. Shatter this postulate, and modern physics becomes an elaborate farce! (...) The speed of light is c+v."

Answer 2 (possibly preventing the collapse of modern physics): Because...

There is no reasonable statement that could become Answer 2:

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."

Pentcho Valev
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ALBERT EINSTEIN INSTITUTE REFUTES RELATIVITY Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 1 August 6th 14 08:27 AM
GRAVITATIONAL REDSHIFT REFUTES EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 3 May 2nd 13 07:28 AM
Jim Oberg will be speaking at the University of North Texas, Denton, Texas, on Monday, October 25. James Oberg History 26 October 29th 03 10:28 PM
Jim Oberg will be speaking at the University of North Texas, Denton, Texas, on Monday, October 25. OM Space Shuttle 4 October 28th 03 12:50 AM
Jim Oberg will be speaking at the University of North Texas, Denton, Texas, on Monday, October 27. James Oberg Misc 0 October 20th 03 09:30 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.