Doppler Effect contradictory to Special Relativity? Chapt 8 #120; ATOM TOTALITY
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Experts doubt Einstein..... but Einstein Dingleberries still worship him
Next: Pound & Rebka in error Re: Doppler Effect contradictory to Special Relativity? Chapt 8 #121; ATOM TOTALITY
From: Archimedes Plutonium on 1 Jun 2010 12:19 Enrico wrote: (snipped) > > "The frequency of the photon "falling" towards the bottom of the tower > is blueshifted. Pound and Rebka countered the gravitational blueshift > by moving the emittor away from the receiver, thus generating a > relativistic Doppler redshift:" > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound-Rebka_experiment > > > Enrico Funny how I should know that experiment, but did not. That is the first time I am aware of it. I have to ponder that experiment as written up on Wikipedia: --- a quote on the Pound-Rebka experiment of Wikipedia --- When the same atom in its base state encounters a photon with that same frequency and energy, it will absorb that photon and transit to the excited state. If the photon's frequency and energy is different by even a little, the atom cannot absorb it (this is the basis of quantum theory). --- end quoting --- It is hard for me to conceive of atoms and photons acting like some Cosmic baton laying team effort, making sure that gravity photons and doppler photons are exactly equal. Pound and Rebka base their experiment on the truth of General Relativity. But that is a quicksand belief, for GR is ultimately false, since gravity must be a EM force. No mention of Special Relativity in Pound and Rebka. Question Enrico: Is not the Juric and Jarrett cosmic mapping of the galaxies using the Doppler redshift: http://www.astro.princeton.edu/~mjuric/universe/all100.gif http://www.astro.princeton.edu/universe/ http://spider.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/jarrett/papers/LSS/ Tell me Enrico, isn't that a ultimate "absolute time and space frame of reference" exercise? Is not what Jarrett and Juric are doing with Doppler redshift, making a Absolute time, energy and space Reference Frame, and thus in total contradiction to Special Relativity Principle-- that there cannot be a absolute reference frame? I only briefly read parts of Pound and Rebka Experiment, and I wonder if a better assessment or evaluation of what is going on is that light is refracted, and not Doppler redshifted. That there are two refractions involved? And that there never was a interface of General Relativity for that is a fake theory. For according to the Atom Totality, gravity is simply the EM of Space interacting as Dirac's positron space with that of the matter or material which is electron's of the atom-totality. Anyway, I have to ponder this. But sometimes it is better to not think about these things and just let the overall picture sink in. The overall picture is that Juric and Jarrett are mapping the Cosmic skies of galaxies based on Doppler redshift, but is not that mapping a contradiction to Special Relativity? Is not their mapping an Absolute time and space mapping? What I am driving at, is that Doppler redshift and Special Relativity are contradictory. One of the two is fake. SR is not fake for it is another way of saying that a magnet and wire motions are invariant in the Maxwell equations. That means the Doppler redshift of light waves must be a fake theory. The Doppler Effect is fine and dandy for sound waves, for sound has no Special Relativity involved. But once you try to strap and saddle light waves with a Doppler Effect, you eliminate Special Relativity. And the Juric and Jarrett program of galaxy mapping is the end result of a Absolute Space and Time mapping. So where does the Pound and Rebka Experiment have its true evaluation of what is going on in that experiment? Is it a case of a multiple refraction? 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 |