info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Impossible Constancy of the Speed of Light
74 views
Skip to first unread message
Pentcho Valev
Mar 28, 2016, 7:35:53 AM3/28/16
to
Einsteinians teach that the moving light source, just like the moving sound source, emits a changed wavelength:
http://phys.org/news/2016-03-nonlinear-rotational-doppler-effect.html
"The acoustic Doppler effect can be experienced day in the real world every: An ambulance siren sounds sharper closer to the emergency vehicle; when the vehicle pulls away, the siren sound descends. This is due to the change of wavelength of the sound waves, which are compressed or stretched during the movement of the sound source, thus changing its pitch. The effect applies to all kinds of waves, including light waves. Similarly, as a star moves away from Earth, its emitted light wave is stretched, creating the so-called red-shift, i.e. a longer wavelength of light."
True for sound waves, false for light waves - the wavelength emitted by the moving light source is the same as the wavelength emitted by the stationary source:
http://newt.phys.unsw.edu.au/einsteinlight/jw/module3_weird_logic.htm
"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."
That is, moving Zoe measures the speed of the light to be c, the frequency to be f, and the wavelength to be λ=c/f, just as stationary Zoe.
Conclusion: The moving light source does not emit shorter/longer wavelength. Rather, it emits faster/slower light. If the source starts moving towards the stationary observer with speed v, the speed of the light relative to the observer shifts from c to c'=c+v, as predicted by Newton's emission theory of light and in violation of Einstein's relativity. Accordingly, the frequency measured by the observer shifts from f=c/λ to f'=c'/λ, where λ is the wavelength and f is the frequency measured when the source is stationary. Exactly the same shifts, from c to c'=c+v and from f=c/λ to f'=(c+v)/λ, take place when the light source is permanently stationary but the observer starts moving towards the source with speed v:
http://www.hep.man.ac.uk/u/roger/PHYS10302/lecture18.pdf
"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/λ waves pass a fixed point. A moving point adds another vt/λ. So f'=(c+v)/λ."
http://rockpile.phys.virginia.edu/mod04/mod34.pdf
"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) [=(c+v)/λ] ... There are relativistic corrections, but these are negligible here."
Pentcho Valev
http://phys.org/news/2016-03-nonlinear-rotational-doppler-effect.html
"The acoustic Doppler effect can be experienced day in the real world every: An ambulance siren sounds sharper closer to the emergency vehicle; when the vehicle pulls away, the siren sound descends. This is due to the change of wavelength of the sound waves, which are compressed or stretched during the movement of the sound source, thus changing its pitch. The effect applies to all kinds of waves, including light waves. Similarly, as a star moves away from Earth, its emitted light wave is stretched, creating the so-called red-shift, i.e. a longer wavelength of light."
True for sound waves, false for light waves - the wavelength emitted by the moving light source is the same as the wavelength emitted by the stationary source:
http://newt.phys.unsw.edu.au/einsteinlight/jw/module3_weird_logic.htm
"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."
That is, moving Zoe measures the speed of the light to be c, the frequency to be f, and the wavelength to be λ=c/f, just as stationary Zoe.
Conclusion: The moving light source does not emit shorter/longer wavelength. Rather, it emits faster/slower light. If the source starts moving towards the stationary observer with speed v, the speed of the light relative to the observer shifts from c to c'=c+v, as predicted by Newton's emission theory of light and in violation of Einstein's relativity. Accordingly, the frequency measured by the observer shifts from f=c/λ to f'=c'/λ, where λ is the wavelength and f is the frequency measured when the source is stationary. Exactly the same shifts, from c to c'=c+v and from f=c/λ to f'=(c+v)/λ, take place when the light source is permanently stationary but the observer starts moving towards the source with speed v:
http://www.hep.man.ac.uk/u/roger/PHYS10302/lecture18.pdf
"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/λ waves pass a fixed point. A moving point adds another vt/λ. So f'=(c+v)/λ."
http://rockpile.phys.virginia.edu/mod04/mod34.pdf
"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) [=(c+v)/λ] ... There are relativistic corrections, but these are negligible here."
Pentcho Valev
David Fuller
Mar 28, 2016, 10:02:42 AM3/28/16
to
http://deutsch.physics.ucsc.edu/6A/book/momentum/node3.html
Ke = 1/2 m(p/m)^2 = p^2/(2m)
Space time is a Derivate of, a By-Product of (the Gravitation of kg's of Matter)
David Fuller
Mar 28, 2016, 10:11:44 AM3/28/16
to
sqr(299792458) * 2 = p^2
sqr(299792458) * 299792458 = 2m
1/(26944002417373989539335912 / 179751035747363528) = 6.6712819e-9
6.6712819e-9 / G
(100/2) = 50
(6.6712819e-9 / gravitational constant) / 2 = 49.9790376
David Fuller
Mar 28, 2016, 10:24:49 AM3/28/16
to
https://goo.gl/photos/f5n1Ap33ryAZ2HxPA
7^2 + 1 = 50
Truncated Octahedral Tessellation
https://goo.gl/photos/dLuqKs3NigGq9KHr8
David Fuller
Mar 28, 2016, 10:40:15 AM3/28/16
to
sqr(299792458) * 299792458 = p^2
Ewan
Mar 28, 2016, 1:56:41 PM3/28/16
to
Pentcho Valev wrote:
> http://newt.phys.unsw.edu.au/einsteinlight/jw/module3_weird_logic.htm
> "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."
ANOTHER FALSE PROFIT. EVEN A TRAINED REMOTE VIEWER CANNOT PINPOINT EXACT
> http://newt.phys.unsw.edu.au/einsteinlight/jw/module3_weird_logic.htm
> "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."
DATES, BECAUSE THE FUTURE IS IN A CONSTANT STATE OF QUANTUM FLUX WITH
EXCEPTION TO NEXUS POINTS!
David Fuller
Mar 28, 2016, 2:08:47 PM3/28/16
to
ANOTHER FALSE PROFIT. EVEN A TRAINED REMOTE VIEWER CANNOT PINPOINT EXACT
DATES, BECAUSE THE FUTURE IS IN A CONSTANT STATE OF QUANTUM FLUX WITH
EXCEPTION TO NEXUS POINTS!
Why are you screaming?
DATES, BECAUSE THE FUTURE IS IN A CONSTANT STATE OF QUANTUM FLUX WITH
EXCEPTION TO NEXUS POINTS!
Remote viewing is possible if we are falling through a pre-existing copy of information stored on a pre-existing event Horizon.
In 1995, Susskind, along with collaborators Tom Banks, Willy Fischler, and Stephen Shenker, presented a formulation of the new M-theory using a holographic description in terms of charged point black holes, the D0 branes of type IIA string theory. The Matrix theory they proposed was first suggested as a description of two branes in 11-dimensional supergravity by Bernard de Wit, Jens Hoppe, and Hermann Nicolai. The later authors reinterpreted the same matrix models as a description of the dynamics of point black holes in particular limits. Holography allowed them to conclude that the dynamics of these black holes give a complete non-perturbative formulation of M-theory. In 1997, Juan Maldacena gave the first holographic descriptions of a higher-dimensional object, the 3+1-dimensional type IIB membrane, which resolved a long-standing problem of finding a string description which describes a gauge theory. These developments simultaneously explained how string theory is related to some forms of supersymmetric quantum field theories.
David Fuller
Mar 28, 2016, 2:32:21 PM3/28/16
to
Falling through a previous existing copy of information would be almost 100% energy efficient
We would not have actual free will being bound to repeat the same template of actions as last time, but we would not Know we are repeating ourselves.... So it would be OK.
We would not have actual free will being bound to repeat the same template of actions as last time, but we would not Know we are repeating ourselves.... So it would be OK.
David Waite
Mar 29, 2016, 12:30:42 AM3/29/16
to
Pentcho Valev
Mar 29, 2016, 10:50:11 AM3/29/16
to
Honest Einsteinians have discovered that the constancy of the speed of light is "a cosmic conspiracy of the highest order":
http://astro.cornell.edu/academics/courses/astro109/readings/speedlimit.htm
Neil deGrasse Tyson: "If everyone, everywhere and at all times, is to measure the same speed for the beam from your imaginary spacecraft, a number of things have to happen. First of all, as the speed of your spacecraft increases, the length of everything - you, your measuring devices, your spacecraft - shortens in the direction of motion, as seen by everyone else. Furthermore, your own time slows down exactly enough so that when you haul out your newly shortened yardstick, you are guaranteed to be duped into measuring the same old constant value for the speed of light. What we have here is A COSMIC CONSPIRACY OF THE HIGHEST ORDER."
https://plus.maths.org/content/einstein-relativity
David Tong: "Special relativity is where the famous equation E=mc^2 comes from. The central idea of the theory is that there is a speed limit in our Universe. The laws of physics conspire so that nothing can ever travel faster than the speed of light."
http://www.redorbit.com/news/space/1113378923/cosmic-yarns-science-fiction-and-the-cosmic-speed-limit-042715/
Robert Scherrer: "In fact, the laws for adding and subtracting speeds have to conspire to keep the speed of the light the same no matter how fast or in what direction an observer is moving. The only way to make this happen is for space and time to expand or contact as objects move."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dc3-29dguFs
Brian Greene: "Einstein proposed a truly stunning idea - that space and time could work together, constantly adjusting by exactly the right amount so that no matter how fast you might be moving, when you measure the speed of light it always comes out to be 671000000 miles per hour."
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/special-relativity-nutshell.html
Brian Greene: "If space and time did not behave this way, the speed of light would not be constant and would depend on the observer's state of motion. But it is constant; space and time do behave this way. Space and time adjust themselves in an exactly compensating manner so that observations of light's speed yield the same result, regardless of the observer's velocity."
Pentcho Valev
http://astro.cornell.edu/academics/courses/astro109/readings/speedlimit.htm
Neil deGrasse Tyson: "If everyone, everywhere and at all times, is to measure the same speed for the beam from your imaginary spacecraft, a number of things have to happen. First of all, as the speed of your spacecraft increases, the length of everything - you, your measuring devices, your spacecraft - shortens in the direction of motion, as seen by everyone else. Furthermore, your own time slows down exactly enough so that when you haul out your newly shortened yardstick, you are guaranteed to be duped into measuring the same old constant value for the speed of light. What we have here is A COSMIC CONSPIRACY OF THE HIGHEST ORDER."
https://plus.maths.org/content/einstein-relativity
David Tong: "Special relativity is where the famous equation E=mc^2 comes from. The central idea of the theory is that there is a speed limit in our Universe. The laws of physics conspire so that nothing can ever travel faster than the speed of light."
http://www.redorbit.com/news/space/1113378923/cosmic-yarns-science-fiction-and-the-cosmic-speed-limit-042715/
Robert Scherrer: "In fact, the laws for adding and subtracting speeds have to conspire to keep the speed of the light the same no matter how fast or in what direction an observer is moving. The only way to make this happen is for space and time to expand or contact as objects move."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dc3-29dguFs
Brian Greene: "Einstein proposed a truly stunning idea - that space and time could work together, constantly adjusting by exactly the right amount so that no matter how fast you might be moving, when you measure the speed of light it always comes out to be 671000000 miles per hour."
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/special-relativity-nutshell.html
Brian Greene: "If space and time did not behave this way, the speed of light would not be constant and would depend on the observer's state of motion. But it is constant; space and time do behave this way. Space and time adjust themselves in an exactly compensating manner so that observations of light's speed yield the same result, regardless of the observer's velocity."
Pentcho Valev
Tom Roberts
Mar 30, 2016, 9:36:50 AM3/30/16
to
On 3/29/16 3/29/16 9:50 AM, Pentcho Valev wrote:
> http://astro.cornell.edu/academics/courses/astro109/readings/speedlimit.htm
> Neil deGrasse Tyson: ["time dilation" and "length contraction"]What we have
> http://astro.cornell.edu/academics/courses/astro109/readings/speedlimit.htm
> here is A COSMIC CONSPIRACY OF THE HIGHEST ORDER."
What we really have is a simple rotation in spacetime. Tyson is just being
overly dramatic, and Valev is just being his usual ignorant self.
Tom Roberts
Pentcho Valev
Mar 30, 2016, 6:39:31 PM3/30/16
to
The impossible constancy of the speed of light became possible in 1905, but at a price:
http://negrjp.fotoblog.uol.com.br/images/photo20150819051851.jpg
Pentcho Valev
http://negrjp.fotoblog.uol.com.br/images/photo20150819051851.jpg
Pentcho Valev
al...@interia.pl
Mar 31, 2016, 12:39:22 PM3/31/16
to
Pentcho Valev
Apr 4, 2016, 12:38:59 PM4/4/16
to
http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/247175/howd-you-explain-red-shift-and-blue-shift-with-respect-to-doppler-effect
Question in StackExchange: "I understand Doppler effect in Sound and Water because there we can observe relative speeds. But in case of light, the speed is same in all references so is the change in relative wavelength due to the inability to change relative velocity?"
My answer:
There is no change in wavelength, and in the case of moving observer (receiver) this is obvious:
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. (...) Here is an animation of the receiver moving towards the source:
http://www.einstein-online.info/images/spotlights/doppler/doppler_detector_blue.gif
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."
Since "four pulses are received in the time it takes the source to emit three pulses", the speed of the pulses relative to the receiver is greater than their speed relative to the source, in violation of Einstein's relativity.
Pentcho Valev
Question in StackExchange: "I understand Doppler effect in Sound and Water because there we can observe relative speeds. But in case of light, the speed is same in all references so is the change in relative wavelength due to the inability to change relative velocity?"
My answer:
There is no change in wavelength, and in the case of moving observer (receiver) this is obvious:
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. (...) Here is an animation of the receiver moving towards the source:
http://www.einstein-online.info/images/spotlights/doppler/doppler_detector_blue.gif
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."
Since "four pulses are received in the time it takes the source to emit three pulses", the speed of the pulses relative to the receiver is greater than their speed relative to the source, in violation of Einstein's relativity.
Pentcho Valev
0 new messages