Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.

Topic: ever since 1842, the Doppler shift was assumed to exist for
lightwaves and never experimentally verified Chapt 8 #138; ATOM TOTALITY

Replies: 122   Last Post: Jul 10, 2010 2:38 PM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com Posts: 7,405 Registered: 3/31/08
ever since 1842, the Doppler shift was assumed to exist for
lightwaves and never experimentally verified Chapt 8 #138; ATOM TOTALITY

Posted: Jun 5, 2010 2:35 PM

A reader has asked me to not go over 200 posts in a thread as that it
is too difficult to retrieve the thread.
So I will oblige.

Also I had some typo errors of my previous post.

--- repeating my post of last night to David and with a few typo
errors such as the ommission of the word
Doppler in some places ---
Jun 5, 3:56 am

- Hide quoted text -

David Bernier wrote:

> Imagine the police radar is at rest and emits sine waves with
> crests one meter apart (a signal at about 300 Mega-Hertz).

> Suppose a mirror is moving away at 10% of the speed of light from

> When a crest advances 1 meter, the mirror recedes by 0.1 meter.
> The question is then what is the crest-to-crest separation
> after reflection off the mirror?

> This might involve special relativity, I'm not completely sure.
> But think about planets orbiting about far away stars. It's often
> said that as the earth-planet radial velocity varies as
> the planet moves in its orbit, periodic variations in
> spectral lines (wavelengths or frequencies) are measured,
> interpreted as Doppler effects.  Don't you think
> this is well established?

> David Bernier

All physical systems involve SR, since SR is nothing more than saying
that
the Maxwell Equations are invariant as per whether a magnet is moving
or a
wire loop is moving while the other is stationary.

discovered in
1842; Michelson Morley Experiment 1887; Special Relativity of
Lorentz-
Poincare
1900; Hubble Law of redshift of galaxies 1929.

Questions, David:
(1) Would there be any reason for any scientist to question whether
lightwaves
obeyed a Doppler shift? The actual history shows that noone bothered
to
question whether lightwaves must or must not have a Doppler Effect.

Answer to (1) When the Michelson interferometer experiment arose,
there should
have been at least one physicist or mathematician to raise the
question of whether
we can assume the doppler effect exists for lightwaves. Because the
Interferometer
actually measures wavelengths. So beyond 1887, some people, a few
should have
no longer assumed or presumed that lightwaves obey a Doppler Effect
and begin
to experiment or look for Doppler effect on lightwaves. To my
knowledge, noone
did any such. Noone even raised the question, and all were asleep
under the assumption.

(2) Should anyone have questioned whether a Doppler Effect existed on
lightwaves
after Special Relativity was formulated by Lorentz, Poincare and
later
by Einstein?
Answer (2) as David even mentions that SR comes into question with
the
Doppler
Effect. But here again, apparently not a single person in physics nor
mathematics
raised the fundamental questions of whether SR can support a Doppler
Effect
on lightwaves?

(3) So here comes 1929 with the Hubble Law and we can appreciate how
totally
immersed into the belief or misbelief of a Doppler Shift prevalent
and
pervasive.
So the question is by 1929 and after, what chances were there that
anyone in
physics or mathematics was sober enough to ask the fundamental
question:
is Doppler (sic) lightwaves and Special Relativity compatible or
Answer: By the time of the Hubble Law, only a lone wolf could ask for
a objective
research into whether Doppler Effect on lightwaves contradicted
Special Relativity.

Do you see the historical pattern, David? That a Doppler effect was
so
presumed,
that noone from 1842 to 2010, had the objective commonsense to
question
the assumption of whether lightwaves can have a Doppler shift.

Now, possibly a mathematician from 1842 to 2010 is more likely to
call
attention
to the question of whether Doppler is compatible with SR. Since a
mathematician
often works with consistency and with contradictions. A physicist is
unlikely to
have suspected anything wrong. And a mathematician is more likely to
spot where
a scientist is "making an assumption" that needs valid evidence. From
Christian
Doppler in 1842, who was a mathematician, noone really stepped up and
said
"let us no longer assume lightwaves can be Doppler shifted, but let
us
show
evidence that such is or is not the case." Noone did this. They were
crushed
under the avalanche of Hubble's law and then under the mountain of
the

Noteworthy, David, there has never been a eye witness case example to
anything
involving light and a Doppler shift. Unlike sound from a train to
prove Doppler shift
on Soundwaves, noone has seen a Doppler shift on lightwaves. And
there
is one
case in particular that a Doppler Shift should occur but has not. And
that case is
the radio on the Space Station with the astronauts. Their radio is
not
Doppler shifted
of any radio signal from ground. If their radio has no Doppler shift,
then no Doppler
shift on lightwaves exists. If the world has any Doppler shift, the
in the Space Station listening to radio ground waves should have a
Doppler shift.
But they have no shift.

And the Space Station is a similar experiment to the Michelson Morley
experiment where
the end result in both cases is a "null result". No Doppler shift in
either the Space Station
nor the Michelson interferometer.

Final question David: How could so many be fooled into thinking their
Doppler shifted? Answer: easily fooled since the speed of the object
is begot whether
a Doppler shift exists or does not exist when using the radar

--- end quoting my previous post ---

Basically what I want to direct the attention of the
Physics and Math community is the attention to the
fact that a Doppler Shift on lightwaves or EM spectrum
is nonexistent and is easily proven by the fact that any car radio
antennae is never Doppler shifted to radio waves, whether the car is
in motion or not. And the
Space Station of astronauts moving at large speeds compared to the
puny car speeds has no Doppler shift

So if there is no Doppler shift on radio waves, no matter what the
speed of source versus object, then
why in the world would anyone believe Doppler Effect
occurrs on any EM wave?

Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

Date Subject Author
6/5/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/6/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/6/10 pete
6/6/10 ostap_bender_1900@hotmail.com
6/6/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/6/10 ostap_bender_1900@hotmail.com
6/6/10 Mike Dworetsky
6/6/10 David Bernier
6/6/10 Mike Dworetsky
6/6/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/7/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/7/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/6/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/7/10 Mike Dworetsky
6/7/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/7/10 Mike Dworetsky
6/8/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/8/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/8/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/8/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/8/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/8/10 Porky Pig Jr
6/9/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/10/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/10/10 Mike Dworetsky
6/10/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/10/10 Mike Dworetsky
6/10/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/11/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/11/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/12/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/13/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/13/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/13/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/13/10 bert
6/14/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/14/10 Porky Pig Jr
6/14/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/14/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/15/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/15/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/6/10 Porky Pig Jr
6/7/10 bjacoby@iwaynet.net
6/7/10 Androcles
6/7/10 ostap_bender_1900@hotmail.com
6/7/10 ostap_bender_1900@hotmail.com
6/7/10 Brian Q. Hutchings
6/15/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/15/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/15/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/15/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/15/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/16/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/16/10 Porky Pig Jr
6/17/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/17/10 bert
6/17/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/18/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/19/10 Owen Jacobson
6/19/10 Androcles
6/19/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/22/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/22/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/22/10 Frederick Williams
6/22/10 Owen Jacobson
6/22/10 Androcles
6/22/10 David R Tribble
6/22/10 Androcles
6/23/10 David R Tribble
6/23/10 Androcles
6/28/10 Mitchell Jones
6/22/10 Uncle Al
6/22/10 David R Tribble
6/23/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/23/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/23/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/23/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/23/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/24/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/24/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/25/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/25/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/25/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/25/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/26/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/26/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/26/10 Cassidy Furlong
6/27/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/27/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/27/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/28/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/28/10 Brian Q. Hutchings
6/29/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/29/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/29/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/29/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
7/1/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
7/1/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
7/1/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
7/2/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
7/8/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
7/8/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
7/8/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
7/10/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
7/10/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/19/10 Owen Jacobson
6/19/10 Androcles
6/19/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/19/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/20/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/20/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/20/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/21/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/21/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/21/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/21/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/21/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/22/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/18/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/18/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/18/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/22/10 plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com
6/23/10 NoEinstein