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

MOVING OBSERVER TOPPLES EINSTEIN



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 7th 14, 09:12 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default MOVING OBSERVER 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 period T' = (lambda)/(v+u). Observed frequency shift f'=f(1±u/v) (negative sign means observer moving AWAY)"

Clearly the derivation of the Doppler frequency shift:

f' = f(1±u/v)

is based on the assumption:

"Speed observed = v+u" (v is the speed of the waves relative to the stationary source)

This assumption is fatal for special relativity and yet it is the only reasonable one. If Einsteinians believe it is false, they should state that explicitly, e.g. in the following way:

False: Speed observed = v+u

True: Speed observed = v

Then honest Einsteinians should advance some other assumption, justify it as best they can, and deduce the frequency shift f'=f(1±u/v) from it. Until this is done, the assumption:

"Speed observed = v+u"

remains the only reasonable one, confirmed experimentally countless times (insofar as the frequency shift f'=f(1±u/v) has been confirmed experimentally countless times).

Pentcho Valev
  #2  
Old January 7th 14, 04:07 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default MOVING OBSERVER TOPPLES EINSTEIN

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)."

The assumption:

"Relative to you, the waves travel at a higher speed: v'=v+vO"

is fatal for special relativity. Einsteinians worship the antithesis:

"Relative to you, the waves travel at the same speed: v'=v, Divine Einstein, yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity"

but the problem is that the frequency shift, f'=(v+vO)/(lambda), cannot be derived from the antithesis, v'=v. Clearly the antithesis is false and Redner's assumption:

"Relative to you, the waves travel at a higher speed: v'=v+vO"

is true. Special relativity is violated.

Pentcho Valev
  #3  
Old January 9th 14, 07:35 AM posted to sci.astro
Brad Guth[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,941
Default MOVING OBSERVER TOPPLES EINSTEIN

On 1/7/2014 1:12 AM, Pentcho Valev wrote:
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 period T' = (lambda)/(v+u). Observed frequency shift f'=f(1±u/v) (negative sign means observer moving AWAY)"

Clearly the derivation of the Doppler frequency shift:

f' = f(1±u/v)

is based on the assumption:

"Speed observed = v+u" (v is the speed of the waves relative to the stationary source)

This assumption is fatal for special relativity and yet it is the only reasonable one. If Einsteinians believe it is false, they should state that explicitly, e.g. in the following way:

False: Speed observed = v+u

True: Speed observed = v

Then honest Einsteinians should advance some other assumption, justify it as best they can, and deduce the frequency shift f'=f(1±u/v) from it. Until this is done, the assumption:

"Speed observed = v+u"

remains the only reasonable one, confirmed experimentally countless times (insofar as the frequency shift f'=f(1±u/v) has been confirmed experimentally countless times).

Pentcho Valev

Nicely done.

  #4  
Old January 9th 14, 11:12 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default MOVING OBSERVER TOPPLES EINSTEIN

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. (...) Relativistic Doppler Effect: These results depend on the absolute velocities of the source and observer, not just on the relative velocity of the two. That seems odd, but is allowable as sound waves are waves in a medium, and motion relative to the medium may legitimately matter. But for light (or EM radiation in general) there is no medium, and this must be wrong. This needs relativity. (...) If the source is regarded as fixed and the observer is moving, then the observer's clock runs slow. They will measure time intervals as being shorter than they are in the rest frame of the source, and so they will measure frequencies as being higher, again by a gamma factor: f'=(1+v/c)(gamma)f..."

"In time t, ct/lambda waves pass a fixed point." That is, the speed of the light waves relative to the fixed point is c.

"A moving point adds another vt/lambda." That is, in time t, (c+v)t/lambda waves pass the moving point and the speed of the light waves relative to the moving point is c'=c+v, in violation of special relativity.

If v is smaller than c/3, the relativistic corrections can be ignored and both f'=(c+v)/lambda and c'=c+v are virtually exact formulas, no matter whether the relativistic or non-relativistic Doppler effect is considered.

Pentcho Valev
  #5  
Old January 15th 14, 06:56 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default MOVING OBSERVER TOPPLES EINSTEIN

Einstein refuted in a single sentence:

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."

For the moving observer the formula:

(frequency) = (speed of the light wave)/(wavelength)

is valid, and since "the moving observer sees a wave possessing the same wavelength", the shift in frequency can only be due to a shift in the speed of the light wave relative to the observer. That is, as the observer starts moving towards the light source with (small) speed v, the frequency shifts from f=c/L to f'=(c+v)/L (L is the wavelength), which obviously implies that the speed of the light relative to the observer shifts from c to c'=c+v, in violation of special relativity.

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
VARIABLE SPEED OF LIGHT TOPPLES EINSTEIN Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 1 January 2nd 14 06:37 PM
DOPPLER TOPPLES EINSTEIN Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 5 August 25th 13 01:51 AM
MOVING OBSERVER TOPPLES SPECIAL RELATIVITY Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 4 June 21st 12 02:27 PM
EINSTEIN TOPPLED BY MOVING OBSERVER Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 11 July 26th 10 11:33 PM
THE JOURNAL NATURE INVOLUNTARILY TOPPLES EINSTEIN Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 8 June 26th 10 11:27 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:25 PM.


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.