DOPPLER TOPPLES EINSTEIN

http://physics.ucsd.edu/students/cou...cs2c/Waves.pdf
"Doppler effect (...) Let u be speed of source or observer (...) Doppler Shift: Moving Observer. Shift in frequency only, wavelength does not change. Speed observed = v+u (...) Observed frequency shift f'=f(1±u/v)"

The above analysis concerns all waves: v is the speed of the waves relative to the source. In the case of light waves v=c and the "speed observed" is therefore c'=f'L=c±u, in violation of special relativity (L is the wavelength). The following video clearly shows that, when the observer starts moving relative to the source, the wavelength remains unchanged but both the frequency and the speed of the light waves relative to the observer change:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=EVzUyE2oD1w
"Fermilab physicist, Dr. Ricardo Eusebi, discusses the Doppler effect..."

Pentcho Valev

Both Newton's emission theory of light and Maxwell's 19th century electromagnetic theory had predicted that the speed of light relative to the observer varies with the speed of the observer. In 1905 Einstein abused both theories by advancing his false light postulate which, combined with the principle of relativity, led to the absurd conclusion that the speed of light is independent of the speed of the observer. Einsteinians relish exposing the contradiction between Newton and Einstein but do not want to hear of any contradiction between Maxwell and Einstein. Such problems are easily solved in Divine Albert's world: Maxwell's 19th century electromagnetic theory had predicted that the speed of light relative to the observer is independent of the speed of the observer and that's it, Divine Einstein, yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity:

http://www.physics.fsu.edu/courses/s...Relativity.htm
Prof. Harrison B. Prosper, Florida State University: "In 1905 Albert Einstein introduced his theory of special relativity. With this theory Einstein sought to make the laws of motion consistent with James Clerk Maxwell's (1831-1879) laws of electromagnetism. Those laws predicted that light in vacuum traveled at a speed c (about 300,000 km/s) that was independent of the motion of the observer of the light and of the light source. Newton's law of motion, however, predicted that the speed of light should depend upon the motion of the observer. Einstein basically sided with Maxwell!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mpw68rvF4pc
"Brian Cox discusses Einstein's theory of relativity"

http://www.physics.fsu.edu/courses/S...15-ch27__2.pdf
"He [Maxwell] also showed the speed of light is independent of the motion of both the source and the observer."

http://www.lecture-notes.co.uk/sussk...al-relativity/
Leonard Susskind: "One of the predictions of Maxwell's equations is that the velocity of electromagnetic waves, or light, is always measured to have the same value, regardless of the frame in which it is measured."

http://www.amazon.com/Why-Does-mc2-S.../dp/0306817586
Why Does E=mc2?: (And Why Should We Care?), Brian Cox, Jeff Forshaw, p. 91: "...Maxwell's brilliant synthesis of the experimental results of Faraday and others strongly suggested that the speed of light should be the same for all observers."

http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/o/orwe...hapter1.7.html
"In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable what then?"

Pentcho Valev

http://rockpile.phys.virginia.edu/mod04/mod34.pdf
"Now let's see what this does to the frequency of the light. We know that even without special relativity, observers moving at different velocities measure different frequencies. (This is the reason the pitch of an ambulance changes as it passes you it doesn't change if you're on the ambulance). This is called the Doppler shift, and for small relative velocity v it is easy to show that the frequency shifts from f to f(1+v/c) (it goes up heading toward you, down away from you). There are relativistic corrections, but these are negligible here."

So we have:

f' = f(1+v/c) = (c+v)/L = c'/L

where f' is the frequency measured by an observer moving with speed v towards the light source, f=c/L is the frequency measured by an observer at rest relative to the source, L is the wavelength, and c'=c+v is the speed of the light waves relative to the moving observer.

The above relations are so obviously correct and so fatal for special relativity that clever Einsteinians practice absolute crimestop in this case:

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."

See more he

http://fqxi.org/data/essay-contest-f...equency_Im.pdf
Shift in Frequency Implies Shift in Speed of Light

Pentcho Valev

Traitors in Einsteiniana:

http://physics.bu.edu/~redner/211-sp...9_doppler.html
Sidney Redner: "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://www.usna.edu/Users/physics/mu...plerEffect.pdf
Carl Mungan: "Consider the case where the observer moves toward the source. In this case, the observer is rushing head-long into the wavefronts, so that we expect v'v. In fact, the wave speed is simply increased by the observer speed, as we can see by jumping into the observer's frame of reference. Thus, v'=v+v_o=v(1+v_o/v). Finally, the frequency must increase by exactly the same factor as the wave speed increased, in order to ensure that L'=L - v'/f'=v/f. Putting everything together, we thus have: OBSERVER MOVING TOWARD SOURCE: L'=L; f'=f(1+v_o/v); v'=v+v_o."

Sidney Redner and Carl Mungan are the worst traitors. They not only suggest that the speed of the light waves varies with the speed of the observer, in violation of special relativity - they also deduce the Doppler frequency shift from this variation. Any sane scientist would find it very difficult to believe that the premise (the speed of light varies with the speed of the observer, c'=c+v) is false when the conclusion deduced from this premise (the frequency varies with the speed of the observer, f'=f(1+v/c)) is true.

Unfortunately there are no sane scientists in Einsteiniana. Sidney Redner and Carl Mungan would surely denounce any variation of the speed of any waves if brothers Einsteinians want them to do so. Here is an Einsteinian demonstrating how the speed of light varies with the speed of the observer and at the same time explaining that there is no variation at all:

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

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, the observer moving towards the light source with speed v measures the frequency to be:

f' = f(1+v/c) = (c+v)/L = c'/L

where f=c/L is the frequency measured by the stationary observer, L is the wavelength, and c'=c+v is the speed of the light waves relative to the moving observer.

Clearly the Doppler effect topples Einstein's relativity.

Pentcho Valev

On Thu, 2 May 2013 23:33:05 -0700 (PDT), Pentcho Valev
wrote:

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, the observer moving towards the light source with speed v measures the frequency to be:

f' = f(1+v/c) = (c+v)/L = c'/L

where f=c/L is the frequency measured by the stationary observer, L is the wavelength, and c'=c+v is the speed of the light waves relative to the moving observer.

Clearly the Doppler effect topples Einstein's relativity.
Look at it this way: (You said)
f' = f(1+v/c) = (c+v)/L = also, factored,
= c/L + v/L = f + v [m/s]/L [m/cycle]
The last term, v/L, is the local increase in frequency, which you can
make yourself by rushing toward the light.
It is the product of speed meters/second, with the wavenumber,
1(cycle)/L meters.
When you separate it like that you can believe it and understand it,
but that doesn't mean you can bundle it up as the sum of speeds c + v.
John Polasek
Pentcho Valev