info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
THE ALBERT EINSTEIN INSTITUTE REFUTES ALBERT EINSTEIN
4 views
Skip to first unread message
Pentcho Valev
Mar 31, 2012, 10:02:49 AM3/31/12
to
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. (...) In the above paragraphs, we have only considered moving sources. In fact, a closer look at cases where it is the receiver that is in motion will show that this kind of motion leads to a very similar kind of 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, the speed of light as measured by the receiver is (4/3)c. In other words, the speed of light (relative to the observer) varies with the speed of the observer, in contradiction with Einstein's special relativity. See also:
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.expo-db.be/ExposPrecedentes/Expo/Ondes/fichiers%20son/Effet%20Doppler.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://www.usna.edu/Users/physics/mungan/Scholarship/DopplerEffect.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.hep.man.ac.uk/u/roger/PHYS10302/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)."
http://www.cmmp.ucl.ac.uk/~ahh/teaching/1B24n/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 and light. (...) Now suppose that the observer is moving with a velocity Vo away from the source. We can tackle this case directly in the same way as we treated the moving 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((c-Vo)/c) when the observer is moving away from the source at a speed Vo."
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
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. (...) In the above paragraphs, we have only considered moving sources. In fact, a closer look at cases where it is the receiver that is in motion will show that this kind of motion leads to a very similar kind of 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, the speed of light as measured by the receiver is (4/3)c. In other words, the speed of light (relative to the observer) varies with the speed of the observer, in contradiction with Einstein's special relativity. See also:
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.expo-db.be/ExposPrecedentes/Expo/Ondes/fichiers%20son/Effet%20Doppler.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://www.usna.edu/Users/physics/mungan/Scholarship/DopplerEffect.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.hep.man.ac.uk/u/roger/PHYS10302/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)."
http://www.cmmp.ucl.ac.uk/~ahh/teaching/1B24n/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 and light. (...) Now suppose that the observer is moving with a velocity Vo away from the source. We can tackle this case directly in the same way as we treated the moving 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((c-Vo)/c) when the observer is moving away from the source at a speed Vo."
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
Tonico
Mar 31, 2012, 1:04:03 PM3/31/12
to
On Mar 31, 7:50 pm, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 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. (...) In the above paragraphs, we have only considered moving sources. In fact, a closer look at cases where it is the receiver that is in motion will show that this kind of motion leads to a very similar kind of 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, the speed of light as measured by the receiver is (4/3)c. In other words, the speed of light (relative to the observer) varies with the speed of the observer, in contradiction with Einstein's special relativity. See also:
>
> 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.expo-db.be/ExposPrecedentes/Expo/Ondes/fichiers%20son/Effe...
> 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. (...) In the above paragraphs, we have only considered moving sources. In fact, a closer look at cases where it is the receiver that is in motion will show that this kind of motion leads to a very similar kind of 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, the speed of light as measured by the receiver is (4/3)c. In other words, the speed of light (relative to the observer) varies with the speed of the observer, in contradiction with Einstein's special relativity. See also:
>
> 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."
>
> "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://www.usna.edu/Users/physics/mungan/Scholarship/DopplerEffect.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.hep.man.ac.uk/u/roger/PHYS10302/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)."
>
> http://www.cmmp.ucl.ac.uk/~ahh/teaching/1B24n/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 and light. (...) Now suppose that the observer is moving with a velocity Vo away from the source. We can tackle this case directly in the same way as we treated the moving 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((c-Vo)/c) when the observer is moving away from the source at a speed Vo."
>
> Pentcho Valev
> pva...@yahoo.com
Idiot
>
> http://www.usna.edu/Users/physics/mungan/Scholarship/DopplerEffect.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.hep.man.ac.uk/u/roger/PHYS10302/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)."
>
> http://www.cmmp.ucl.ac.uk/~ahh/teaching/1B24n/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 and light. (...) Now suppose that the observer is moving with a velocity Vo away from the source. We can tackle this case directly in the same way as we treated the moving 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((c-Vo)/c) when the observer is moving away from the source at a speed Vo."
>
> Pentcho Valev
> pva...@yahoo.com
Pentcho Valev
Apr 1, 2012, 2:04:10 AM4/1/12
to
The Albert Einstein Institute is quite systematic in its refutation of Einstein's relativity:
http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/redshift_white_dwarfs
Albert Einstein Institute: "One of the three classical tests for general relativity is the gravitational redshift of light or other forms of electromagnetic radiation. However, in contrast to the other two tests - the gravitational deflection of light and the relativistic perihelion shift -, you do not need general relativity to derive the correct prediction for the gravitational redshift. A combination of Newtonian gravity, a particle theory of light, and the weak equivalence principle (gravitating mass equals inertial mass) suffices."
The speed of cannonballs shot upwards with initial speed v (relative to the shooter) varies with the gravitational potential (gh) in accordance with the equation v'=v(1-gh/v^2) (it is assumed that v>>(v'-v) and air friction is ignored).
The speed of light emitted upwards with initial speed c (relative to the emitter) varies with the gravitational potential (gh) in accordance with the equation c'=c(1-gh/c^2) given by Newton's emission theory of light. This variation was unequivocally confirmed by the Pound-Rebka experiment:
http://student.fizika.org/~jsisko/Knjige/Klasicna%20Mehanika/David%20Morin/CH13.PDF
David Morin (p. 4): "They [Pound and Rebka] sent gamma rays up a 20m tower and measured the redshift (that is, the decrease in frequency) at the top. This was a notable feat indeed, considering that they were able to measure a frequency shift of gh/c^2 (which is only a few parts in 10^15) to within 1% accuracy."
David Morin's text referred to above reappears as Chapter 14 in:
http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~djmorin/book.html
Introduction to Classical Mechanics With Problems and Solutions, David Morin, Cambridge University Press
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/redshift_white_dwarfs
Albert Einstein Institute: "One of the three classical tests for general relativity is the gravitational redshift of light or other forms of electromagnetic radiation. However, in contrast to the other two tests - the gravitational deflection of light and the relativistic perihelion shift -, you do not need general relativity to derive the correct prediction for the gravitational redshift. A combination of Newtonian gravity, a particle theory of light, and the weak equivalence principle (gravitating mass equals inertial mass) suffices."
The speed of cannonballs shot upwards with initial speed v (relative to the shooter) varies with the gravitational potential (gh) in accordance with the equation v'=v(1-gh/v^2) (it is assumed that v>>(v'-v) and air friction is ignored).
The speed of light emitted upwards with initial speed c (relative to the emitter) varies with the gravitational potential (gh) in accordance with the equation c'=c(1-gh/c^2) given by Newton's emission theory of light. This variation was unequivocally confirmed by the Pound-Rebka experiment:
http://student.fizika.org/~jsisko/Knjige/Klasicna%20Mehanika/David%20Morin/CH13.PDF
David Morin (p. 4): "They [Pound and Rebka] sent gamma rays up a 20m tower and measured the redshift (that is, the decrease in frequency) at the top. This was a notable feat indeed, considering that they were able to measure a frequency shift of gh/c^2 (which is only a few parts in 10^15) to within 1% accuracy."
David Morin's text referred to above reappears as Chapter 14 in:
http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~djmorin/book.html
Introduction to Classical Mechanics With Problems and Solutions, David Morin, Cambridge University Press
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
Tonico
Apr 1, 2012, 8:21:59 AM4/1/12
to
On Apr 1, 9:04 am, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> The Albert Einstein Institute is quite systematic in its refutation of Einstein's relativity:
>
> http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/redshift_white_dwarfs
> Albert Einstein Institute: "One of the three classical tests for general relativity is the gravitational redshift of light or other forms of electromagnetic radiation. However, in contrast to the other two tests - the gravitational deflection of light and the relativistic perihelion shift -, you do not need general relativity to derive the correct prediction for the gravitational redshift. A combination of Newtonian gravity, a particle theory of light, and the weak equivalence principle (gravitating mass equals inertial mass) suffices."
>
> The speed of cannonballs shot upwards with initial speed v (relative to the shooter) varies with the gravitational potential (gh) in accordance with the equation v'=v(1-gh/v^2) (it is assumed that v>>(v'-v) and air friction is ignored).
>
> The speed of light emitted upwards with initial speed c (relative to the emitter) varies with the gravitational potential (gh) in accordance with the equation c'=c(1-gh/c^2) given by Newton's emission theory of light. This variation was unequivocally confirmed by the Pound-Rebka experiment:
>
> http://student.fizika.org/~jsisko/Knjige/Klasicna%20Mehanika/David%20...
> The Albert Einstein Institute is quite systematic in its refutation of Einstein's relativity:
>
> http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/redshift_white_dwarfs
> Albert Einstein Institute: "One of the three classical tests for general relativity is the gravitational redshift of light or other forms of electromagnetic radiation. However, in contrast to the other two tests - the gravitational deflection of light and the relativistic perihelion shift -, you do not need general relativity to derive the correct prediction for the gravitational redshift. A combination of Newtonian gravity, a particle theory of light, and the weak equivalence principle (gravitating mass equals inertial mass) suffices."
>
> The speed of cannonballs shot upwards with initial speed v (relative to the shooter) varies with the gravitational potential (gh) in accordance with the equation v'=v(1-gh/v^2) (it is assumed that v>>(v'-v) and air friction is ignored).
>
> The speed of light emitted upwards with initial speed c (relative to the emitter) varies with the gravitational potential (gh) in accordance with the equation c'=c(1-gh/c^2) given by Newton's emission theory of light. This variation was unequivocally confirmed by the Pound-Rebka experiment:
>
> David Morin (p. 4): "They [Pound and Rebka] sent gamma rays up a 20m tower and measured the redshift (that is, the decrease in frequency) at the top. This was a notable feat indeed, considering that they were able to measure a frequency shift of gh/c^2 (which is only a few parts in 10^15) to within 1% accuracy."
>
> David Morin's text referred to above reappears as Chapter 14 in:
>
> http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~djmorin/book.html
> Introduction to Classical Mechanics With Problems and Solutions, David Morin, Cambridge University Press
>
> Pentcho Valev
> pva...@yahoo.com
Idiot
>
> David Morin's text referred to above reappears as Chapter 14 in:
>
> http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~djmorin/book.html
> Introduction to Classical Mechanics With Problems and Solutions, David Morin, Cambridge University Press
>
> Pentcho Valev
> pva...@yahoo.com
Pentcho Valev
Apr 1, 2012, 3:03:30 PM4/1/12
to
The speed of light (relative to the observer/receiver) varies with the speed of the observer/receiver, v, in accordance with the equation c'=c±v, and with the gravitational potential, gh, in accordance with the equation c'=c(1±gh/c^2), BOTH EQUATIONS GIVEN BY NEWTON'S EMISSION THEORY OF LIGHT:
http://physics.ucsd.edu/students/courses/fall2008/managed/physics11/documents/Lecture5-11.pdf
"Doppler Shift. As long as the velocity of the observer, v, is much smaller than the speed of light, c, (for the case of sound waves much smaller than the speed of sound) then the expression that we derived is a very good approximation. Taking into account v may be in the opposite direction f'=f(1±v/c). At this point you might ask why the shift in direction from the discussion of the equivalence principle. Soon, as we shall see, we can put this together with the equivalence principle to derive the gravitational redshift of light! In 1960 Pound and Rebka and later, 1965, with an improved version Pound and Snider measured the gravitational redshift of light using the Harvard tower, h=22.6m. From the equivalence principle, at the instant the light is emitted from the transmitter, only a freely falling observer will measure the same value of f that was emitted by the transmitter. But the stationary receiver is not free falling. During the time it takes light to travel to the top of the tower, t=h/c, the receiver is traveling at a velocity, v=gt, away from a free falling receiver. Hence the measured frequency is: f'=f(1-v/c)=f(1-gh/c^2)."
Substituting f=c/L and f'=c'/L (L is the wavelength) into f'=f(1-v/c)=f(1-gh/c^2) gives:
c' = c - v = c(1 - gh/c^2)
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
http://physics.ucsd.edu/students/courses/fall2008/managed/physics11/documents/Lecture5-11.pdf
"Doppler Shift. As long as the velocity of the observer, v, is much smaller than the speed of light, c, (for the case of sound waves much smaller than the speed of sound) then the expression that we derived is a very good approximation. Taking into account v may be in the opposite direction f'=f(1±v/c). At this point you might ask why the shift in direction from the discussion of the equivalence principle. Soon, as we shall see, we can put this together with the equivalence principle to derive the gravitational redshift of light! In 1960 Pound and Rebka and later, 1965, with an improved version Pound and Snider measured the gravitational redshift of light using the Harvard tower, h=22.6m. From the equivalence principle, at the instant the light is emitted from the transmitter, only a freely falling observer will measure the same value of f that was emitted by the transmitter. But the stationary receiver is not free falling. During the time it takes light to travel to the top of the tower, t=h/c, the receiver is traveling at a velocity, v=gt, away from a free falling receiver. Hence the measured frequency is: f'=f(1-v/c)=f(1-gh/c^2)."
Substituting f=c/L and f'=c'/L (L is the wavelength) into f'=f(1-v/c)=f(1-gh/c^2) gives:
c' = c - v = c(1 - gh/c^2)
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
0 new messages