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

IS DOPPLER EFFECT FATAL FOR RELATIVITY, EINSTEINIANS ?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 25th 14, 05:45 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default IS DOPPLER EFFECT FATAL FOR RELATIVITY, EINSTEINIANS ?

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

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

The source starts moving towards the observer with (small) speed v1, and the observer starts moving towards the source with (small) speed v2. The measured frequency shifts from f=c/d to f'=(c+v1+v2)/d.

Why does the frequency shift from f=c/d to f'=(c+v1+v2)/d ?

Answer 1 (fatal for relativity): Because the speed of the pulses relative to the observer shifts from c to c'=c+v1+v2.

Answer 2 (expected to save relativity): Because...

There isn't any reasonable statement that could become Answer 2, is there, Einsteinians?

Pentcho Valev
  #2  
Old August 26th 14, 08:07 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default IS DOPPLER EFFECT FATAL FOR RELATIVITY, EINSTEINIANS ?

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

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

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

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

Answer 1 (fatal for relativity): Because the speed of the pulses relative to the observer shifts from c to c'=c+v.

Answer 2 (universally taught by Einsteinians): Because the distance between subsequent pulses shifts from d to d'=c/f':

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

http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/doppler
"Next, let us look at a slightly different situation, where the source is moving towards the detector. We assume that the motion of the sender does not influence the speed at which the pulses travel, and that the pulses are sent with the same frequency as before. Still, as we can see in the following animation, the motion influences the pulse pattern: The distance between successive pulses is now smaller than when both sender and receiver were at rest. Consequently, the pulses arrive at the receiver in quicker succession."

It is not difficult to see that Answer 2 contradicts the principle of relativity. The same answer would correctly be given if sound moved in air or light moved in ether. In such cases an observer moving with the source, by measuring the distance between successive pulses, would be able to distinguish between "I am at rest" (the distance is measured to be d) and "I am in motion" (the distance is measured to be d'). Answer 2 is wrong, Answer 1 is the correct one.

A light source emits a series of short pulses the distance between which is d. A stationary observer measures the frequency of the pulses to be f=c/d:

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

The observer starts moving with (small) speed v towards the 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 (fatal for relativity): Because the motion of the observer cannot change the distance between subsequent pulses (that is, d'=d) and accordingly the speed of the pulses relative to the observer shifts from c to c'=c+v:

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."

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://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."

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."

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."

http://physics.bu.edu/~redner/211-sp...9_doppler.html
"The Doppler effect is the shift in frequency of a wave that occurs when the wave source, or the detector of the wave, is moving. Applications of the Doppler effect range from medical tests using ultrasound to radar detectors and astronomy (with electromagnetic waves). (...) We will focus on sound waves in describing the Doppler effect, but it works for other waves too. (....) Let's say you, the observer, now move toward the source with velocity vO. You encounter more waves per unit time than you did before. Relative to you, the waves travel at a higher speed: v'=v+vO. The frequency of the waves you detect is higher, and is given by: f'=v'/(lambda)=(v+vO)/(lambda)."

http://a-levelphysicstutor.com/wav-doppler.php
"vO is the velocity of an observer moving towards the source. This velocity is independent of the motion of the source. Hence, the velocity of waves relative to the observer is c + vO. (...) The motion of an observer does not alter the wavelength. The increase in frequency is a result of the observer encountering more wavelengths in a given time."

Answer 2: Because the motion of the observer somehow changes the distance between subsequent pulses from d to d'=cd/(c+v). Or, if this sounds too absurd, the distance remains unaffected but something happens to the observer so that what was previously d to him now appears to be d'=cd/(c+v). In any case, the speed of the pulses relative to the observer gloriously remains constant, Divine Einstein, yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity, that's the way ahah ahah we like it, ahah ahah:

http://www.lp2i-poitiers.fr/doc/aps/...oppleffet.html
"The observer moves closer to the source. The wave received has a shorter wavelength (higher frequency) than that emitted by the source. The observer moves away from the source. The wave received has a longer wavelength (lower frequency) than that emitted by the source."

http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teachi...ved/index.html
John Norton: "Every sound or light wave has a particular frequency and wavelength. In sound, they determine the pitch; in light they determine the color. Here's a light wave and an observer. If the observer were to hurry towards the source of the light, the observer would now pass wavecrests more frequently than the resting observer. That would mean that moving observer would find the frequency of the light to have increased (AND CORRESPONDINGLY FOR THE WAVELENGTH - THE DISTANCE BETWEEN CRESTS - TO HAVE DECREASED)."

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."

http://lewebpedagogique.com/physique...8doppler_p.gif

Pentcho Valev
  #3  
Old August 28th 14, 07:52 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default IS DOPPLER EFFECT FATAL FOR RELATIVITY, EINSTEINIANS ?

http://www.aip.org/history/einstein/...relativity.htm
John Stachel: "But here he ran into the most blatant-seeming contradiction, which I mentioned earlier when first discussing the two principles. As noted then, the Maxwell-Lorentz equations imply that there exists (at least) one inertial frame in which the speed of light is a constant regardless of the motion of the light source. Einstein's version of the relativity principle (minus the ether) requires that, if this is true for one inertial frame, it must be true for all inertial frames. But this seems to be nonsense. How can it happen that the speed of light relative to an observer cannot be increased or decreased if that observer moves towards or away from a light beam? Einstein states that he wrestled with this problem over a lengthy period of time, to the point of despair."

Poor Einstein must have been haunted by pictures like the following ones where the speed of the light pulses (relative to the moving observer) obviously shifts in parallel with the shift in frequency:

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

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."

The same absurdity (frequency shifts, speed of the light pulses relative to the moving observer doesn't) is torturing today's students as well:

http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/einstein...eird_logic.htm
Professor Joe Wolfe: "At this stage, many of my students say things like "The invariance of the speed of light among observers is impossible" or "I can't understand it". Well, it's not impossible. It's even more than possible, it is true. This is something that has been extensively measured, and many refinements to the Michelson and Morely experiment, and complementary experiments have confirmed this invariance to very great precision. As to understanding it, there isn't really much to understand. However surprising and weird it may be, it is the case. It's the law in our universe. The fact of the invariance of c doesn't take much understanding: what requires understanding are its consequences, and how it can be integrated into what we already know."

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic..._of_light.html
Don Koks, Steve Carlip, Philip Gibbs: "To state that the speed of light is independent of the velocity of the observer is very counterintuitive. Some people even refuse to accept this as a logically consistent possibility, but in 1905 Einstein was able to show that it is perfectly consistent if you are prepared to give up assumptions about the absolute nature of space and time."

Yet nowadays the student is quickly converted into Bingo the Einsteiniano - a creature able to believe anything his masters tell him to believe:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gX5ajyPr96M
"Bingo the Clowno"

Bingo the Einsteiniano demonstrating how the speed of light (relative to the observer) varies with the speed of the observer and then explaining that only the frequency varies, the speed of light doesn't, Divine Einstein, yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity, that's the way ahah ahah we like it, ahah ahah:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=EVzUyE2oD1w
Dr Ricardo Eusebi: "f'=f(1+v/c). Light frequency is relative to the observer. The velocity is not though. The velocity is the same in all the reference frames."

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
EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY INCOMPATIBLE WITH DOPPLER EFFECT Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 2 August 15th 14 04:01 PM
SPECIAL RELATIVITY INCOMPATIBLE WITH DOPPLER EFFECT Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 4 September 26th 13 05:56 AM
EVEN RELATIVISTIC DOPPLER EFFECT TOPPLES RELATIVITY Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 2 September 10th 13 12:06 PM
DOPPLER EFFECT REFUTES SPECIAL RELATIVITY Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 7 December 30th 11 12:08 PM
DOPPLER EFFECT AGAINST SPECIAL RELATIVITY Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 3 August 22nd 11 12:23 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:46 AM.


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.