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

THE MOST DRAMATIC DILEMMA EVER IN SCIENCE



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 4th 12, 07:24 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default THE MOST DRAMATIC DILEMMA EVER IN SCIENCE

Scientists watch this video:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=EVzUyE2oD1w


and see:


(A) that the speed of the wavecrests relative to the observer decreases as the observer starts moving away from the light source. Suddenly a whole branch of science collapses - to quote Einstein, "nothing will remain of my whole castle in the air, including the theory of gravitation, but also nothing of the rest of contemporary physics".

(B) that only the frequency as measured by the observer decreases while the speed of the wavecrests relative to the observer, by a miracle, remains the same. Initially scientists fiercely sing "Divine Einstein" and "Yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity" but then the ecstasy gets uncontrollable: scientists tumble to the floor, start tearing their clothes and go into convulsions.

Pentcho Valev
  #2  
Old December 8th 12, 08:03 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default THE MOST DRAMATIC DILEMMA EVER IN SCIENCE

Both for sound and for light, the speed of the waves relative to the observer varies with the speed of the observer. That is, the principle of constancy of the speed of light, the linchpin that holds modern physics theories together, is simply false:

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."

http://www.ic.sunysb.edu/Class/phy14...41:lectures:30
"A doppler effect also occurs when an observer moves towards a source, but here the wavelength does not change, instead it is the effective velocity that changes and leads to an apparent change in the frequency of the sound."

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.."

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... (....) 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."

http://www.radartutorial.eu/11.coherent/co06.fr.html
"L'effet Doppler est le décalage de fréquence d'une onde acoustique ou électromagnétique entre la mesure à l'émission et la mesure à la réception lorsque la distance entre l'émetteur et le récepteur varie au cours du temps. (...) Pour comprendre ce phénomène, il s'agit de penser à une onde à une fréquence donnée qui est émise vers un observateur en mouvement, ou vis-versa. LA LONGUEUR D'ONDE DU SIGNAL EST CONSTANTE mais si l'observateur se rapproche de la source, il se déplace vers les fronts d'ondes successifs et perçoit donc plus d'ondes par seconde que s'il était resté stationnaire, donc une augmentation de la fréquence. De la même manière, s'il s'éloigne de la source, les fronts d'onde l'atteindront avec un retard qui dépend de sa vitesse d'éloignement, donc une diminution de la fréquence. Dans le cas sonore, cela se traduit par un son plus aigu lors d'un rapprochement de la source et un son plus grave en s'éloignant de celle-ci. Dans le domaine de la lumière visible, on parle de décalage vers le bleu pour un rapprochement et vers le rouge dans le cas d'éloignement en se référant au spectre lumineux. La même chose s'applique à toutes les gammes d'ondes électromagnétiques dont les ondes utilisées par les radars."

Pentcho Valev
  #3  
Old December 8th 12, 09:50 PM posted to sci.astro
Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 74
Default THE MOST DRAMATIC DILEMMA EVER IN SCIENCE

"Pentcho Valev" wrote in message
...

Both for sound and for light, the speed of the waves relative to the
observer varies with the speed of the observer. That is, the principle of
constancy of the speed of light, the linchpin that holds modern physics
theories together, is simply false:

http://faculty.washington.edu/wilkes...terference.pdf
"Sound waves have speed c, and f and L are related by c=Lf.
================================================== ===

c = L/p where p is the period.

No matter what you read, no matter what you believe, the only possible
constant is p.

-- This message is brought to you from the keyboard of
Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway

  #4  
Old December 9th 12, 08:46 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default THE MOST DRAMATIC DILEMMA EVER IN SCIENCE

Textbooks correctly teach that, for all waves, if the observer starts moving towards the wave source with speed v and if v is low enough, the frequency as measured by the observer shifts from f to f'=f(1+v/c). This implies that, relative to the observer, the speed of the waves shifts from c to c'=c+v. The implication is extremely dangerous when applied to light waves (it leaves modern physics in ruins) so prudent authors avoid it. Here are some examples of careless authors who don't see the danger:

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."

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
Professor Sidney Redner: "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.academia.edu/1740394/Waves_and_Vibrations
Roger Barlow, Professor of Particle Physics: "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://www.cmmp.ucl.ac.uk/~ahh/teach...24n/lect19.pdf
Tony Harker, University College London: "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((c-Vo)/c) when the observer is moving away from the source at a speed Vo."

Pentcho Valev
  #5  
Old December 13th 12, 08:38 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default THE MOST DRAMATIC DILEMMA EVER IN SCIENCE

No sane scientist would continue to believe in the constancy of the speed of light after watching the following videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJMdURM7fbc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ps8BYnDG0A

Clearly one cannot deduce the Doppler frequency shift (moving observer) without assuming, explicitly or implicitly, that the speed of the waves relative to the observer varies with the speed of the observer.

Pentcho Valev
  #6  
Old December 15th 12, 08:18 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default THE MOST DRAMATIC DILEMMA EVER IN SCIENCE

On Friday, December 14, 2012, Tom Roberts wrote in sci.physics.relativity:
Valev repeatedly insists that equations for water waves and sound waves apply to

light. He is wrong.


I am just referring to what clever Einsteinians teach, Honest Roberts:

http://physics.bu.edu/~redner/211-sp...9_doppler.html
Professor 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.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."

http://rockpile.phys.virginia.edu/mod04/mod34.pdf
Paul Fendley: "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 clever Einsteinians teach that, for all waves (light waves included), when v, the speed with which the observer moves towards the source, is low enough, the equation:

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

is valid. And they are right, Honest Roberts, these clever brothers of yours! Then clever Einsteinians readily admit that c'=c+v is the speed of the waves relative to the observer but, if asked "Is c'=c+v the speed of the LIGHT waves relative to the observer?", remain silent, as though by instinct:

http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com/1984-17
George Orwell: "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
 




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
i was responding to deliver you some of my dramatic variants Tariq Quazi Amateur Astronomy 0 December 29th 07 08:29 PM
SETI as a trigger for dramatic change. Jason H. SETI 0 October 2nd 03 07:09 AM
The Non-Innovator's Dilemma Rand Simberg Space Science Misc 76 September 27th 03 03:09 AM
The Non-Innovator's Dilemma Rand Simberg Policy 76 September 27th 03 03:09 AM
The Non-Innovator's Dilemma McLean1382 Policy 1 September 22nd 03 02:48 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:53 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.