Speed of Light: A universal Constant?
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Joan-Claude van Dirk Helps to Trivialize Special Relativity
Next: GOD=G_uv Measure your IQ in 30 seconds
From: PDraper on 22 Mar 2005 12:02 On 3/22/05 9:31 AM, in article w%V%d.6496$rL3.4855(a)fe2.columbus.rr.com, "kenseto" <kenseto(a)erinet.com> wrote: > > "robert j. kolker" <nowhere(a)nowhere.net> wrote in message > news:3aamtkF6bbkreU2(a)individual.net... >> >> >> kenseto wrote: >> >>> That's becasue you failed to recognize that Doppler shift is due to > varying >>> speed of light. >> >> The speed of light in vacuo relative to any inertial frame is a well >> measured constant. It has been shown experimentally again and again and >> has yet to be falsified. The speed of light in vacuo is independent of >> th motion of the source or the observer. > > The speed of light is measured to be constant because we arbitrarily assumed > that the Doppler shift is due to wave length change. If wave length is > assumed to be contant then the speed of light is different from different > sources. > > Ken Seto > > This is hogwash. Speed of light is verified to be constant independent of Doppler-related phenomena. Thus, it is NOT an arbitrary assumption that Doppler shift is due to wave length change. Since the speed of light is known experimentally to be constant, then we know that the Doppler shift is a shift in wavelength (or frequency). *Assuming* the wave length to be constant would demand that the speed of light is not constant, contrary to measurements. PD
From: robert j. kolker on 22 Mar 2005 12:08 kenseto wrote: > > The speed of light is measured to be constant because we arbitrarily assumed > that the Doppler shift is due to wave length change. If wave length is > assumed to be contant then the speed of light is different from different > sources. The speed of light is that same for all frequencies of light. Bob Kolker
From: kenseto on 22 Mar 2005 13:01 "PDraper" <pdraper(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:BE65B9C9.3686%pdraper(a)yahoo.com... > On 3/22/05 9:31 AM, in article w%V%d.6496$rL3.4855(a)fe2.columbus.rr.com, > "kenseto" <kenseto(a)erinet.com> wrote: > > > > > "robert j. kolker" <nowhere(a)nowhere.net> wrote in message > > news:3aamtkF6bbkreU2(a)individual.net... > >> > >> > >> kenseto wrote: > >> > >>> That's becasue you failed to recognize that Doppler shift is due to > > varying > >>> speed of light. > >> > >> The speed of light in vacuo relative to any inertial frame is a well > >> measured constant. It has been shown experimentally again and again and > >> has yet to be falsified. The speed of light in vacuo is independent of > >> th motion of the source or the observer. > > > > The speed of light is measured to be constant because we arbitrarily assumed > > that the Doppler shift is due to wave length change. If wave length is > > assumed to be contant then the speed of light is different from different > > sources. > > > > Ken Seto > > > > > > This is hogwash. Speed of light is verified to be constant independent of > Doppler-related phenomena. Thus, it is NOT an arbitrary assumption that > Doppler shift is due to wave length change. Since the speed of light is > known experimentally to be constant, then we know that the Doppler shift is > a shift in wavelength (or frequency). What you said is hogwash. If we define that the wave length of a specific light source remains constant in all frames then the observed Doppler shift is due to the varying speed of light from these different sources. > > *Assuming* the wave length to be constant would demand that the speed of > light is not constant, Exactly. That's why the Doppler shift is due to the varying speed of light from a moving source. >contrary to measurements. No it is not contrary to measurements. Why? The reason why the speed of light is measured to be constant is because a clock second use to measure light speed contains the appropriate amount of absolute time. This cancels out the effect of absolute motion on the speed of light. The speed of light is a constant math ratio as follows: Light path length of ruler (299,792,458m)/the absolute time content for a clock second co-moving with the ruler. Ken Seto
From: kenseto on 22 Mar 2005 12:57 "robert j. kolker" <nowhere(a)nowhere.net> wrote in message news:3ab1ntF66i2odU3(a)individual.net... > > > kenseto wrote: > > > > > The speed of light is measured to be constant because we arbitrarily assumed > > that the Doppler shift is due to wave length change. If wave length is > > assumed to be contant then the speed of light is different from different > > sources. > > The speed of light is that same for all frequencies of light. Not if you assume that the wave length of the incoming light is the same as that of the source at rest with the observer. Ken Seto
From: bz on 22 Mar 2005 13:29
"kenseto" <kenseto(a)erinet.com> wrote in news:24Z%d.14316$cC6.10056(a)fe2.columbus.rr.com: > What you said is hogwash. If we define that the wave length of a > specific light source remains constant in all frames then the observed > Doppler shift is due to the varying speed of light from these different > sources. > Are you going to say that doppler shift of sound is ALSO due to varying the speed of sound? A car drops a fire cracker on the ground and sets off a fire cracker on the hood of the car at the same time. The 'bang' from the fire cracker on the ground and the one on the hood of the car reach me at the same time. The bang from the one on the hood of the car is dopplar shifted, the one on the ground is not. They both travel through the same air. Why should one travel at a different speed than the other? Why do you think that the sound/light bouncing off of a moving object changes speed? I know that the waves do NOT change speed. How do I know that they don't? I can measure their speed between two points AFTER they have bounced off of something and come back to me. Their transit between the two points will be at the speed of light. Their energy is changed by bouncing off of a moving object, their frequency has changed, but their speed is not changed. This would seem to disprove your idea. Go buy a police doppler lidar and bounce the laser beam off of the blades of a turning fan if you don't believe me. Measure the beam velocity as it goes past two points at different distances from the fan. It will still be moving at c, but the frequency will have changed by the doppler shift. -- bz please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an infinite set. bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap |