THE HYBRID THEORY OF ALBERT EINSTEIN

http://newt.phys.unsw.edu.au/einstei...eird_logic.htm
"How weird is the invariance of the speed of light? Is the principle of Special Relativity really counter-intuitive? It depends on how one expresses it, and to whose intuition one appeals. For example, it does seem counter-intuitive that the speed of light does not depend on the motion of the observer. In our animation, Zoe turns on the headlights of her space ship. She measures the speed of light from her headlights as c with respect to her. Jasper sees her travelling towards him at (let's say) v. He measures the speed of light from her headlights as c. No, not c+v, but just c. Surely this is counter-intuitive? Maybe even crazy? Surely relative speeds add up? Let's consider first two more familiar cases.

Again, Zoe travels towards Jasper at speed v.

• First, suppose that, instead of light, Zoe fires an arrow from her car at speed u, as she measures it. Jasper will measure its speed as v+u, as predicted by Galilean relativity.

• Alternatively, if she sounds the horn, the sound will travel forward with a speed v_sound with respect to the air that is the medium for the sound wave. In the absence of wind, Jasper will measure the sound to be travelling at v_sound, and Zoe will measure its speed relative to her as v_sound−v, again as specified by Galilean relativity.

It is tempting to extrapolate one or other of these results to light: if light is like little arrows, Jasper should measure v+c. If light is like sound, and if its medium is stationary with respect to Jasper, than Zoe should measure its speed as c−v. (We discuss the possibility of a medium for light later.) If we are really careful in our thinking, however, we should also say that light may be neither like arrows nor like sound."
______________________________________
[end of quotation]

That is, according to Einstein's relativity, for the travelling Zoe the speed of light remains c (does not become c'=c-v) - here the analogy with the arrows is valid.

On the other hand, Einstein's relativity says that Jasper measures the speed of the light coming from the travelling Zoe to be c, not c'=c+v - here the analogy with the sound waves is valid.

This hybridization of arrows and sound waves is by no means unproblematic. The travelling Zoe measures the wavelength of the sound waves to have decreased:

λ' = (v_sound − v)/f

where f is the unchanged (for Zoe) frequency. On the other hand, according to Einstein's relativity, both the speed of the light and the frequency remain unchanged for Zoe, which means that the wavelength of the light the travelling Zoe sends is also unchanged:

λ' = c/f = λ

where λ is the wavelength of the light the stationary Zoe sends.

However, if the wavelength of the light the travelling Zoe sends is equal to the wavelength of the light the stationary Zoe sends (λ'=λ), then the shift in frequency Jasper measures can only be due to the fact that the light the travelling Zoe sends is FASTER than the light the stationary Zoe sends. In other words, relative to Jasper, the speed of the light coming from the travelling Zoe is:

c' = c + v

as predicted by Newton's emission theory of light and in violation of Einstein's relativity.

Pentcho Valev

As the light source starts moving towards the observer with (small) speed v, the wavelength of the light it emits

(A) decreases, as with waves other than light waves

(B) remains unchanged

Einsteinians teach that (A) is correct:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDvIhiCnatE
"Doppler Effect In Light Waves"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4OnBYrbCjY
"The Doppler Effect: what does motion do to waves?"

http://www.target.com/p/a-brief-hist...k/-/A-11823016
Stephen Hawking, "A Brief History of Time", Chapter 3: "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."

In fact, the correct choice is (B). Zoe, the observer in the system of the moving source, measures the speed of the light to be c'=c, and the frequency to be f'=f, where c and f are speed and frequency as measured in the system of the stationary source. This means that the wavelength is unaffected by the motion of the source:

λ' = c'/f' = c/f = λ

Jasper, the stationary observer, measures the frequency of the light sent by the moving source to be f'=(c+v)/λ. Accordingly, the speed of the light relative to Jasper is:

c' = λf' = c+v

as predicted by Newton's emission theory of light, in violation of Einstein's relativity.

Pentcho Valev