THE ACHILLES HEEL OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY

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."

That is, if the observer moves towards the source with speed v, then the speed of light relative to him is c'=c+v, the frequency the observer measures is f'=c'/L and the wavelength remains unchanged, L'=L ("the distances between subsequent pulses are not affected").

How can Einsteinians get rid of the dangerous formula c'=c+v and replace it with c'=c, the sacrosanct formula required by special relativity? Ordinary believers (who do not understand anything) sometimes refer to time dilation corrections but clever Einsteinians know that those corrections do not convert c'=c+v into c'=c; if v is low enough, the time dilation corrections are even negligible. So how do clever Einsteinians get rid of the dangerous formula c'=c+v?

They do not and do not need to, simply because their surroundings do not require them to do so:

http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/con...ent=a909857880
Peter Hayes "The Ideology of Relativity: The Case of the Clock Paradox" : Social Epistemology, Volume 23, Issue 1 January 2009, pages 57-78: "The gatekeepers of professional physics in the universities and research institutes are disinclined to support or employ anyone who raises problems over the elementary inconsistencies of relativity. A winnowing out process has made it very difficult for critics of Einstein to achieve or maintain professional status. Relativists are then able to use the argument of authority to discredit these critics. Were relativists to admit that Einstein may have made a series of elementary logical errors, they would be faced with the embarrassing question of why this had not been noticed earlier. Under these circumstances the marginalisation of antirelativists, unjustified on scientific grounds, is eminently justifiable on grounds of realpolitik. Supporters of relativity theory have protected both the theory and their own reputations by shutting their opponents out of professional discourse."

Still the fact that the motion of the observer cannot change the wavelength ("the distances between subsequent pulses are not affected") remains the Achilles heel of special relativity. The moving observer measures the frequency to be:

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

and if the wavelength remains unchanged (L'=L), then we have c'=c+v, in violation of special relativity.

See more he

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

Pentcho Valev

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?"

The frequency the moving observer measures is:

f'=(c+v)/L or f'=(c-v)/L

where v is the speed of the observer relative to the light source and L is the wavelength.

For all waves other the light waves, the following formula is valid:

f'=c'/L

where c' is the speed of the waves relative to the moving observer. Sane scientists know that the formula f'=c'/L is valid for ALL waves, light waves included:

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."

http://www.donbosco-tournai.be/expo-...fetDoppler.pdf
"La variation de la fréquence observée lorsqu'il y a mouvement relatif entre la source et l'observateur est appelée effet Doppler. (...) 6. Source immobile - Observateur en mouvement: La distance entre les crêtes, la longueur d'onde lambda ne change pas. Mais la vitesse des crêtes par rapport à l'observateur change !"

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."

http://www.phys.uconn.edu/~gibson/No...6_3/Sec6_3.htm
Professor George N. Gibson, University of Connecticut: "However, if either the source or the observer is moving, things change. This is called the Doppler effect. (...) To understand the moving observer, imagine you are in a motorboat on the ocean. If you are not moving, the boat will bob up and down with a certain frequency determined by the ocean waves coming in. However, imagine that you are moving into the waves fairly quickly. You will find that you bob up and down more rapidly, because you hit the crests of the waves sooner than if you were not moving. So, the frequency of the waves appears to be higher to you than if you were not moving. Notice, THE WAVES THEMSELVES HAVE NOT CHANGED, only your experience of them. Nevertheless, you would say that the frequency has increased. Now imagine that you are returning to shore, and so you are traveling in the same direction as the waves. In this case, the waves may still overtake you, but AT A MUCH SLOWER RATE - you will bob up and down more slowly. In fact, if you travel with exactly the same speed as the waves, you will not bob up and down at all. The same thing is true for sound waves, or ANY OTHER WAVES. (...) The formula for the frequency that the observer will detect depends on the speed of the observer; the larger the speed the greater the effect. If we call the speed of the observer, Vo, the frequency the observer detects will be: f'=f(1+Vo/Vwave). Here, f is the original frequency and Vwave is the speed of the wave."

http://www.cmmp.ucl.ac.uk/~ahh/teach...24n/lect19.pdf
Tony Harker, University College London: "The Doppler Effect: Moving sources and receivers. The phenomena which occur when a source of sound is in motion are well known. The example which is usually cited is the change in pitch of the engine of a moving vehicle as it approaches. In our treatment we shall not specify the type of wave motion involved, and our results will be applicable to sound or to light. (...) Now suppose that the observer is moving with a velocity Vo away from the source. (...) If the observer moves with a speed Vo away from the source (...), then in a time t the number of waves which reach the observer are those in a distance (c-Vo)t, so the number of waves observed is (c-Vo)t/lambda, giving an observed frequency f'=f(1-Vo/c) when the observer is moving away from the source at a speed Vo."

Pentcho Valev

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mp3CZAS8lw

SOUND WAVES:

1. Both source and observer at rest:

speed of waves relative to the observer: c

frequency the observer measures: f=c/L

wavelength passing the observer: L

2. Observer moving towards the source with speed v:

speed of waves relative to the observer: c'=c+v

frequency the observer measures: f'=(c+v)/L

wavelength passing the observer: L'=L

LIGHT WAVES:

1. Both source and observer at rest:

speed of waves relative to the observer: c

frequency the observer measures: f=c/L

wavelength passing the observer: L

2. Observer moving towards the source with speed v:

speed of waves relative to the observer: c'=???

frequency the observer measures: f'=(c+v)/L

wavelength passing the observer: L'=???

Clever Einsteinians know that the correct answers are c'=c+v and L'=L, which is fatal for special relativity of course. They also know that the alternative that saves special relativity, c'=c and L'=cL/(c+v), is so obviously silly that it could be a danger even in Divine Albert's totalitarian world. So the absurd variation of the wavelength with the speed of the observer, L'=cL/(c+v), is usually not discussed in Einsteiniana but still exceptions can be found:

http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teachi...ved/index.html
John Norton: "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)."

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

Pentcho Valev

Einsteinians readily explain blueshift and redshift when the SOURCE of light is moving - as in the case of sound waves, the motion of the source changes the wavelength so that the speed of the light relative to the observer remains unchanged, Divine Einstein, yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity:

http://www.amazon.com/Brief-History-.../dp/0553380168
Stephen Hawking, "A Brief History of Time", Chapter 3: "...we must first understand the Doppler effect. As we have seen, visible light consists of fluctuations, or waves, in the electromagnetic field. The wavelength (or distance from one wave crest to the next) of light is extremely small, ranging from four to seven ten-millionths of a meter. The different wavelengths of light are what the human eye sees as different colors, with the longest wavelengths appearing at the red end of the spectrum and the shortest wavelengths at the blue end. 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. This means that the wavelength of the waves we receive is shorter than when the star was stationary. Correspondingly, if the source is moving away from us, the wavelength of the waves we receive will be longer. In the case of light, therefore, means that stars moving away from us will have their spectra shifted toward the red end of the spectrum (red-shifted) and those moving toward us will have their spectra blue-shifted."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5w9UbA9y5U
Properties of Light: Doppler Effect

The problem is that the motion of the OBSERVER obviously cannot change the wavelength, as in the case of sound waves:

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."

The only reasonable conclusion is that, when the observer moves towards the light source with speed v, the speed of light relative to him is:

c' = f'L = c+v

where f' is the frequency the moving observer measures and L is the wavelength.

Pentcho Valev

http://www.cmmp.ucl.ac.uk/~ahh/teach...24n/lect19.pdf
Tony Harker, University College London: "The Doppler Effect: Moving sources and receivers. The phenomena which occur when a source of sound is in motion are well known. The example which is usually cited is the change in pitch of the engine of a moving vehicle as it approaches. In our treatment we shall not specify the type of wave motion involved, and our results will be applicable to sound or to light. (...) Now suppose that the observer is moving with a velocity Vo away from the source. (....) If the observer moves with a speed Vo away from the source (...), then in a time t the number of waves which reach the observer are those in a distance (c-Vo)t, so the number of waves observed is (c-Vo)t/lambda, giving an observed frequency f'=f(1-Vo/c) when the observer is moving away from the source at a speed Vo."

If in a time t the number of waves which reach the observer are those in a distance:

D = (c-Vo)t

then the speed of the light waves relative to the observer is:

c' = D/t = c-Vo

in violation of special relativity. It takes constant and painful exercise in crimestop to maintain the belief that c'=c-Vo is wrong and c'=c (required by special relativity) gloriously true:

http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/o/orwe...hapter3.4.html
"He set to work to exercise himself in crimestop. He presented himself with propositions - "the Party says the earth is flat", "the party says that ice is heavier than water" - and trained himself in not seeing or not understanding the arguments that contradicted them. It was not easy. It needed great powers of reasoning and improvisation. The arithmetical problems raised, for instance, by such a statement as "two and two make five" were beyond his intellectual grasp. It needed also a sort of athleticism of mind, an ability at one moment to make the most delicate use of logic and at the next to be unconscious of the crudest logical errors. Stupidity was as necessary as intelligence, and as difficult to attain."

Pentcho Valev

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 statement "Speed observed = v+u" (v is the speed of the waves relative to the source) triggers the following reaction from Bingo the Einsteiniano:

http://www.theglaringfacts.com/wp-co...fearappeal.jpg

Bingo the Einsteiniano is the name of any person in Divine Albert's world who has undergone special brainwashing in Einsteiniana, brainwashing very similar to the one undergone by an unfortunate creature called Bingo the Clowno:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kACHU5eSwQ
Bingo !!! Bingo the Clown-O!!!

Pentcho Valev