![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
When it comes to rigorous deduction, even relativists (implicitly)
admit that the motion of the observer cannot alter the wavelength of the light wave: http://members.home.nl/fg.marcelis/reldop.pdf The observer O receives a light wave from the source S. The wavelength of the emitted wave is Ls. (...) Let Ts be the time in which one wavelength is emitted as measured by a clock that is moving along with S. (...) Now let's suppose that the source is at rest and the observer is moving with velocity v in the direction of the source. Let To be the time in which the observer passes one wavelength, as measured by a clock that is moving along with the observer. In the time To the observer travels a distance v*To to the left and the light wave travels a distance Ls-v*To to the right. The light's distance is also equal to c*To. So Ls - v*To = c*To. Or c*Ts = c*To + v*To. The observed period in case of a moving observer is To = Ts(c/(c+v)) __________________________________________ [end of quotation] The last result, combined with the formula (frequency) = (speed of the light wave)/(wavelength) entails that the observer measures the frequency to be Fo=Fs(1+v/c) and the speed of the light wave to be c'=c+v. Pentcho Valev |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Annular Doppler effect | Szczepan Bialek | History | 0 | November 5th 11 06:02 PM |
Special Relativity proof Chapt9 Proof that Doppler shift isnonexistent in light-waves #46 Atom Totality theory 5th ed. | Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 21 | October 13th 11 09:26 PM |
DOPPLER EFFECT AGAINST SPECIAL RELATIVITY | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 3 | August 22nd 11 12:23 PM |
Fallacy of Relativistic Doppler Effect | Koobee Wublee | Astronomy Misc | 149 | April 14th 11 03:08 AM |
Photon hypothesis, special relativity and photoelectric effect | Koobee Wublee | Astronomy Misc | 0 | February 18th 11 06:11 AM |