found the flaw of the Pound & Rebka Experiment Re: Doppler Effect contradictory to Special Relativity? Chapt 8 #122; ATOM TOTALITY
in [Math]
|
Prev: Doppler Effect contradictory to Special Relativity? Chapt 8 #120; ATOM TOTALITY
Next: Unsolvability of the Entscheidungsproblem as a Corollary ofGödel’s 2nd Theorem
From: Archimedes Plutonium on 1 Jun 2010 13:12 Archimedes Plutonium wrote: > Archimedes Plutonium wrote: > > 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 > > > > --- quoting from Wikipedia of the actual experiment itself --- > The test was carried out at Harvard University's Jefferson laboratory. > A solid sample containing iron (57Fe) emitting gamma rays was placed > in the center of a loudspeaker cone which was placed near the roof of > the building. Another sample containing 57Fe was placed in the > basement. The distance between this source and absorber was 22.5 > meters (73.8 ft). The gamma rays traveled through a Mylar bag filled > with helium to minimize scattering of the gamma rays. A scintillation > counter was placed below the receiving 57Fe sample to detect the gamma > rays that were not absorbed by the receiving sample. By vibrating the > speaker cone the gamma ray source moved with varying speed, thus > creating varying Doppler shifts. When the Doppler shift canceled out > the gravitational blueshift, the receiving sample absorbed gamma rays > and the number of gamma rays detected by the scintillation counter > dropped accordingly. > --- end quoting --- > > Enrico, correct me if I am wrong, but the above sounds to me like a > case in which > you have two refractors. Where you have photons hitting one refractor, > then those > refracted photons hitting a second refractor to restore what Pound and > Rebka > wanted to restore. > > Correct me if wrong, but the above Pound and Rebka Experiment is > reproducable > by me in my own experiment of the Fiberglass panel in which I look at > oncoming > headlights of cars. They are redshifted. But now, suppose I find the > second Fiberglass > panel that refracts and scatters (scattering is an awfully important > feature of Pound > and Rebka and of mine own fiberglass). But suppose I find the > fiberglass panel > that counteracts the refraction and scattering of the first panel? > > So I suspect that my own fiberglass panel experiment is a duplication > of Pound and > Rebka, only that Pound and Rebka have the theory all wrong and in > error. > > Aha!, I think I found the flaw in the Pound/Rebka Experiment. The reliance on the Mylar bag full of helium. It is a refractor. So can this experiment ever be performed without a refractor?? No. It is totally reliant on refracting the gamma rays. What Pound and Rebka were experimenting with was refraction and scattering physics, not what they thought was gravity and doppler shift. The Pound and Rebka Experiment is a experiment into the ability to refract, scatter photons and says almost nothing about gravity nor Doppler shift. It is and was an exercise experiment into the refraction of light waves, not of the gravity or Doppler effect on light waves. And I can see and understand why noone picked that up or picked that out, that innocent error. When you are looking for something that you expect to find at the end of an experiment, you can easily rig the experiment, not knowing you rigged the experiment and get your end result that you wished for. If you eliminate the Mylar bag full of helium, then there is no Pound & Rebka Experiment on _supposed gravity and doppler shift_. This Pound and Rebka experiment was a refraction and scattering experiment all along. 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
From: Enrico on 1 Jun 2010 15:30 On Jun 1, 11:12 am, Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archime...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Archimedes Plutonium wrote: > > Archimedes Plutonium wrote: > > > 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 > > > --- quoting from Wikipedia of the actual experiment itself --- > > The test was carried out at Harvard University's Jefferson laboratory. > > A solid sample containing iron (57Fe) emitting gamma rays was placed > > in the center of a loudspeaker cone which was placed near the roof of > > the building. Another sample containing 57Fe was placed in the > > basement. The distance between this source and absorber was 22.5 > > meters (73.8 ft). The gamma rays traveled through a Mylar bag filled > > with helium to minimize scattering of the gamma rays. A scintillation > > counter was placed below the receiving 57Fe sample to detect the gamma > > rays that were not absorbed by the receiving sample. By vibrating the > > speaker cone the gamma ray source moved with varying speed, thus > > creating varying Doppler shifts. When the Doppler shift canceled out > > the gravitational blueshift, the receiving sample absorbed gamma rays > > and the number of gamma rays detected by the scintillation counter > > dropped accordingly. > > --- end quoting --- > > > Enrico, correct me if I am wrong, but the above sounds to me like a > > case in which > > you have two refractors. Where you have photons hitting one refractor, > > then those > > refracted photons hitting a second refractor to restore what Pound and > > Rebka > > wanted to restore. > > > Correct me if wrong, but the above Pound and Rebka Experiment is > > reproducable > > by me in my own experiment of the Fiberglass panel in which I look at > > oncoming > > headlights of cars. They are redshifted. But now, suppose I find the > > second Fiberglass > > panel that refracts and scatters (scattering is an awfully important > > feature of Pound > > and Rebka and of mine own fiberglass). But suppose I find the > > fiberglass panel > > that counteracts the refraction and scattering of the first panel? > > > So I suspect that my own fiberglass panel experiment is a duplication > > of Pound and > > Rebka, only that Pound and Rebka have the theory all wrong and in > > error. > > Aha!, I think I found the flaw in the Pound/Rebka Experiment. The > reliance > on the Mylar bag full of helium. It is a refractor. So can this > experiment ever > be performed without a refractor?? No. It is totally reliant on > refracting the > gamma rays. What Pound and Rebka were experimenting with was > refraction > and scattering physics, not what they thought was gravity and doppler > shift. > > The Pound and Rebka Experiment is a experiment into the ability to > refract, > scatter photons and says almost nothing about gravity nor Doppler > shift. > > It is and was an exercise experiment into the refraction of light > waves, not of > the gravity or Doppler effect on light waves. > > And I can see and understand why noone picked that up or picked that > out, > that innocent error. When you are looking for something that you > expect to > find at the end of an experiment, you can easily rig the experiment, > not knowing > you rigged the experiment and get your end result that you wished for. > If you > eliminate the Mylar bag full of helium, then there is no Pound & Rebka > Experiment > on _supposed gravity and doppler shift_. > > This Pound and Rebka experiment was a refraction and scattering > experiment all > along. > > Archimedes Plutoniumhttp://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/ > whole entire Universe is just one big atom > where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - ============================================================ > > Aha!, I think I found the flaw in the Pound/Rebka Experiment. The > reliance > on the Mylar bag full of helium. It is a refractor. So can this > experiment ever > be performed without a refractor?? No. It is totally reliant on > refracting the > gamma rays. What Pound and Rebka were experimenting with was > refraction > and scattering physics, not what they thought was gravity and doppler > shift. > Try here: http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_frm/thread/e5ba6e339fc7f3b2/dbe60195873f75ec#dbe60195873f75ec Scroll down halfway thru the document and see: " Introduction: Doppler Shift An experimental shift similar in scale to the hyperfine splitting is that of the Doppler shift. If a nucleus is moving when it decays, the energy of the emitted gamma rays will be shifted. If it is moving toward an absorber, higher energy gamma rays will be seen at the absorber. If it is moving away from the absorber, lower energy gamma rays will be seen. This Doppler shift changes the gamma ray energy by an amount " <Math garbled by copy/paste> DE = vE0 c ( 7) <,\Math> " where v is the speed of the source. (For a derivation, see [3].) Exercise 6: Estimate the velocity needed to counteract the hyperfine splitting in Fe57 using the result of Exercise 5. Materials and " This looks like a physics lab exercise. Scroll down to the procedure section and see: " III. Insert Source A. Use Pb gloves and tongs B. Turn off constant acceleration drive C. Screw on source D. Turn on constant acceleration drive E. Adjust gain and frequency to just below high frequency tone " I don't see any mylar bag of helium or any other refractors. If you need more details of this experiment, you might be able to get them from the university - UCSB (?) or the references at the end of the document. Enrico
From: Enrico on 1 Jun 2010 15:40
On Jun 1, 11:12 am, Archimedes Plutonium <plutonium.archime...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Archimedes Plutonium wrote: > > Archimedes Plutonium wrote: > > > 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 > > > --- quoting from Wikipedia of the actual experiment itself --- > > The test was carried out at Harvard University's Jefferson laboratory. > > A solid sample containing iron (57Fe) emitting gamma rays was placed > > in the center of a loudspeaker cone which was placed near the roof of > > the building. Another sample containing 57Fe was placed in the > > basement. The distance between this source and absorber was 22.5 > > meters (73.8 ft). The gamma rays traveled through a Mylar bag filled > > with helium to minimize scattering of the gamma rays. A scintillation > > counter was placed below the receiving 57Fe sample to detect the gamma > > rays that were not absorbed by the receiving sample. By vibrating the > > speaker cone the gamma ray source moved with varying speed, thus > > creating varying Doppler shifts. When the Doppler shift canceled out > > the gravitational blueshift, the receiving sample absorbed gamma rays > > and the number of gamma rays detected by the scintillation counter > > dropped accordingly. > > --- end quoting --- > > > Enrico, correct me if I am wrong, but the above sounds to me like a > > case in which > > you have two refractors. Where you have photons hitting one refractor, > > then those > > refracted photons hitting a second refractor to restore what Pound and > > Rebka > > wanted to restore. > > > Correct me if wrong, but the above Pound and Rebka Experiment is > > reproducable > > by me in my own experiment of the Fiberglass panel in which I look at > > oncoming > > headlights of cars. They are redshifted. But now, suppose I find the > > second Fiberglass > > panel that refracts and scatters (scattering is an awfully important > > feature of Pound > > and Rebka and of mine own fiberglass). But suppose I find the > > fiberglass panel > > that counteracts the refraction and scattering of the first panel? > > > So I suspect that my own fiberglass panel experiment is a duplication > > of Pound and > > Rebka, only that Pound and Rebka have the theory all wrong and in > > error. > > Aha!, I think I found the flaw in the Pound/Rebka Experiment. The > reliance > on the Mylar bag full of helium. It is a refractor. So can this > experiment ever > be performed without a refractor?? No. It is totally reliant on > refracting the > gamma rays. What Pound and Rebka were experimenting with was > refraction > and scattering physics, not what they thought was gravity and doppler > shift. > > The Pound and Rebka Experiment is a experiment into the ability to > refract, > scatter photons and says almost nothing about gravity nor Doppler > shift. > > It is and was an exercise experiment into the refraction of light > waves, not of > the gravity or Doppler effect on light waves. > > And I can see and understand why noone picked that up or picked that > out, > that innocent error. When you are looking for something that you > expect to > find at the end of an experiment, you can easily rig the experiment, > not knowing > you rigged the experiment and get your end result that you wished for. > If you > eliminate the Mylar bag full of helium, then there is no Pound & Rebka > Experiment > on _supposed gravity and doppler shift_. > > This Pound and Rebka experiment was a refraction and scattering > experiment all > along. > > Archimedes Plutoniumhttp://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium/ > whole entire Universe is just one big atom > where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - ============================================================ > Aha!, I think I found the flaw in the Pound/Rebka Experiment. The > reliance > on the Mylar bag full of helium. It is a refractor. So can this > experiment ever > be performed without a refractor?? No. It is totally reliant on > refracting the > gamma rays. What Pound and Rebka were experimenting with was > refraction > and scattering physics, not what they thought was gravity and doppler > shift. Try here: http://www.physics.ucsb.edu/~phys128/experiments/mossbauer/mossbauer.pdf Scroll down halfway thru the document and see: " Introduction: Doppler Shift An experimental shift similar in scale to the hyperfine splitting is that of the Doppler shift. If a nucleus is moving when it decays, the energy of the emitted gamma rays will be shifted. If it is moving toward an absorber, higher energy gamma rays will be seen at the absorber. If it is moving away from the absorber, lower energy gamma rays will be seen. This Doppler shift changes the gamma ray energy by an amount " <Math garbled by copy/paste> DE = vE0 c ( 7) <,\Math> " where v is the speed of the source. (For a derivation, see [3].) Exercise 6: Estimate the velocity needed to counteract the hyperfine splitting in Fe57 using the result of Exercise 5. Materials and " This looks like a physics lab exercise. Scroll down to the procedure section and see: " III. Insert Source A. Use Pb gloves and tongs B. Turn off constant acceleration drive C. Screw on source D. Turn on constant acceleration drive E. Adjust gain and frequency to just below high frequency tone " I don't see any mylar bag of helium or any other refractors. If you need more details of this experiment, you might be able to get them from the university - UCSB (?) or the references at the end of the document. Enrico |