Prev: Data Entry Work - iFlame Data Entry Services
Next: A Local Property of Convex Sets
From: Pentcho Valev on 11 Aug 2010 05:15
Pentcho Valev wrote:
> However one is entitled to assume that this "stretching" is just as
> silly as the variation of the speed of light with the speed of the
> observer and advance the following argument...

Mistake: I wrote "speed of light" instead of "wavelength". Here is the
corrected text:

The formula:

(frequency) = (speed of light)/(wavelength)

has always been a nightmare in Einsteiniana. This formula makes the
obvious fact "Both the frequency and the speed of light vary with the
speed of the observer", a fact consistent with both Maxwell's theory
and Newton's emission theory of light (but not with Divine Albert's
Divine Special Relativity), too obvious. That is, even in
Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world, where any idiocy is welcome, the
formula might prove dangerous for Einstein's 1905 false light
postulate. So Einsteinians fiercely teach that it is the wavelength
that varies with the speed of the observer:

http://sampit.geol.sc.edu/Doppler.html
"Moving observer: A man is standing on the beach, watching the tide.
The waves are washing into the shore and over his feet with a constant
frequency and wavelength. However, if he begins walking out into the
ocean, the waves will begin hitting him more frequently, leading him
to perceive that the wavelength of the waves has decreased."

http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/big_bang/index.html
John Norton: "Here's a light wave and an observer. If the observer
were to hurry towards the source of the light, the observer would now
pass wavecrests more frequently than the resting observer. That would
mean that moving observer would find the frequency of the light to
have increased (AND CORRESPONDINGLY FOR THE WAVELENGTH - THE DISTANCE
BETWEEN CRESTS - TO HAVE DECREASED)."

Similarly, when confronted with Hubble redshift, Einsteinians fiercely
teach that the allegedly EXPANDING universe somehow "stretches" the
wavelength and so the constancy of the speed of light is saved.
However one is entitled to assume that this "stretching" is just as
silly as the variation of the wavelength with the speed of the
observer and advance the following argument:

PREMISE 1: The frequency of light coming from distant sources
decreases proportionally to the distance (Hubble redshift).

PREMISE 2: "Stretching" of the wavelength does not occur.

CONCLUSION: In our STATIC universe, the speed of light coming from
distant sources decreases proportionally to the distance.

Pentcho Valev wrote:

PREMISE 1: The wavelength of light cannot vary with the speed of the
observer.

PREMISE 2: (frequency) = (speed of light)/(wavelength)

CONCLUSION: The speed of light varies with the speed of the observer,
that is, Einstein's 1905 light postulate is false.

Pentcho Valev
pvalev(a)yahoo.com
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: Data Entry Work - iFlame Data Entry Services
Next: A Local Property of Convex Sets