Doppler effect by light, a myth or reality ?
Doppler has observed its effect of frequency of sound getting longer (lower) when the source is moving away and frequency of sound getting shorter (higher) when the source is coming closer
a simple question here: was the same observed in lab also for light or is "red shift" just a theoretical conclusion based on preposition that Doppler effect also exists by the light (without observing it )
if so the idea of universe expanding has no experimental validity
QUOTE (amrit+Sep 15 2006, 10:32 PM)
...a simple question here: was the same observed in lab also for light or is "red shift" just a theoretical conclusion based on preposition that Doppler effect also exists by the light ...
The frequency of light is becoming lower when the source is going away by the same way, Amrit. The automobile speed in traffic by policeman or storm speed scanning by meteorologic radars or LIDAR system in aeronautic are based on the same principles. For example, we can detect the Sun rotation by the direct observation of sunspots, but the direct measurement of the Doppler shift on the Sun surface supplies the same result. We can even detect the solar quake by such measurement with precision at the range of 10 m/sec relative speed.
On the right is is standard Doppler radar output, which is used for the measurement of relative speed of storm clouds by using of microwave radiation. Laser Dppler Velocimetryis widely used in the lab.
So we have both lab, both outdoor experiments, Amrit, face it.... You're just spreading the nonsenses about physic for whole life - so you should start to think about your role and usefulness for physic and the rest of civilization.
You know, I'm not very happy from your overall activity here...
The frequency of light is becoming lower when the source is going away by the same way, Amrit. The automobile speed in traffic by policeman or storm speed scanning by meteorologic radars or LIDAR system in aeronautic are based on the same principles. For example, we can detect the Sun rotation by the direct observation of sunspots, but the direct measurement of the Doppler shift on the Sun surface supplies the same result. We can even detect the solar quake by such measurement with precision at the range of 10 m/sec relative speed.
On the right is is standard Doppler radar output, which is used for the measurement of relative speed of storm clouds by using of microwave radiation. Laser Dppler Velocimetryis widely used in the lab.
So we have both lab, both outdoor experiments, Amrit, face it.... You're just spreading the nonsenses about physic for whole life - so you should start to think about your role and usefulness for physic and the rest of civilization.
You know, I'm not very happy from your overall activity here...
zephir happiness has to be much deeper mind can reach
do not be disturbed by the mind, not mine mind not yours
clear enough : Doppler was not observed in lab by the light as it was by the sound
do not be disturbed by the mind, not mine mind not yours
clear enough : Doppler was not observed in lab by the light as it was by the sound
QUOTE (amrit+Sep 15 2006, 10:56 PM)
Clear enough : Doppler was not observed in lab by the light as it was by the sound
Negative, try to compare the laser and ultrasound anemometer, used for the measurement of the speed of wind. The principle is the same - Doppler effect for the waves.
Clear enough, you're simply lying, because such claim can be verified easily by using of Google in few seconds...
How to deal with the people, which are adjusting the reality to suit their need, Amrit?
Negative, try to compare the laser and ultrasound anemometer, used for the measurement of the speed of wind. The principle is the same - Doppler effect for the waves.
Clear enough, you're simply lying, because such claim can be verified easily by using of Google in few seconds...
How to deal with the people, which are adjusting the reality to suit their need, Amrit?
zeph discuss to you sometime is quite helpless
this are electronic devices that do not work on Doppler by light
no such an instrument was ever build
this are electronic devices that do not work on Doppler by light
no such an instrument was ever build
QUOTE (amrit+Sep 16 2006, 12:15 AM)
...this are electronic devices that do not work on Doppler by light..
LOL...
Do you suppose, this device is fake? Consider medical treatment, Amrit.
LOL...
Do you suppose, this device is fake? Consider medical treatment, Amrit.
zephir you take a source of light in lab
you build up a machine that will move the source away with a very high speed
when you will see that light is changing frequency to read ( from the source that moves away fast) than this means Doppler effect of light.
but such an experiment was never done in lab as far as I know
you build up a machine that will move the source away with a very high speed
when you will see that light is changing frequency to read ( from the source that moves away fast) than this means Doppler effect of light.
but such an experiment was never done in lab as far as I know
To research and prove all physical effects in a lab You have to build another Universe with everything in it. Why bother if one exists already?
Having not been able to reproduce something is a laboratory has no relation to the existance of the effect, e.g. Doppler. It just reflects our inability to build a device. Or may be there is just no need to build one.
I think it enough to notice some effect 100 million times (like e.g. Doppler) in Nature to be able to declare it exists. And why so much worry about Doppler effect which is commonplace? For some events, it is enough to observe them only once in Nature, as they never repeat in a lab because they are unique. Which still does not change the fact they existed.
What was Your point?
Having not been able to reproduce something is a laboratory has no relation to the existance of the effect, e.g. Doppler. It just reflects our inability to build a device. Or may be there is just no need to build one.
I think it enough to notice some effect 100 million times (like e.g. Doppler) in Nature to be able to declare it exists. And why so much worry about Doppler effect which is commonplace? For some events, it is enough to observe them only once in Nature, as they never repeat in a lab because they are unique. Which still does not change the fact they existed.
What was Your point?
QUOTE (Ivars+Sep 16 2006, 10:50 AM)
What was Your point?
Hi Ivars,
let me explain what is "on the table" if
Amrit:
is right.
Nonetheless, that would be tremendous! Amrit makes rough and direct cosmological conclusion: Observed space-"frequency shift" is not KINEMATICAL by its origin, ergo Universe is not expanding at all (or at least, the shift is not the sign of it).
Besides "massive gravyphoton" this would be of the highest degree of importance.
Hi Ivars,
let me explain what is "on the table" if
Amrit:
QUOTE
...such an experiment was never done in lab as far as I know
is right.
Nonetheless, that would be tremendous! Amrit makes rough and direct cosmological conclusion: Observed space-"frequency shift" is not KINEMATICAL by its origin, ergo Universe is not expanding at all (or at least, the shift is not the sign of it).
Besides "massive gravyphoton" this would be of the highest degree of importance.
similar case is with gravitational waves
1. Einstein speculates about GW first in 1916.
2. GW has been never observed, never detected.
3. change of speed of rotation of neutron binary stars is explained by gravitational radiation
according to my understanding there is mistake here in the process of scientific research.
YOU CAN NOT EXPLAİN A WİTH B UNTİL B WAS NOT OBSERVED EXPERİMENTALY
A = change of speed of rotation of binary star
B = gravitational waves
A = expanding of the universe
B = Doppler effect by the light
there is big GAP here
Turya is the only one here see that
other people do not want to see it
WHY ?
1. Einstein speculates about GW first in 1916.
2. GW has been never observed, never detected.
3. change of speed of rotation of neutron binary stars is explained by gravitational radiation
according to my understanding there is mistake here in the process of scientific research.
YOU CAN NOT EXPLAİN A WİTH B UNTİL B WAS NOT OBSERVED EXPERİMENTALY
A = change of speed of rotation of binary star
B = gravitational waves
A = expanding of the universe
B = Doppler effect by the light
there is big GAP here
Turya is the only one here see that
other people do not want to see it
WHY ?
Hello,
Thanks for Explanation. As a PROOF it would help to make something in a lab.
What I was thinking is that it is enough to THINK from the facts available today and decide what is the right model because most likely only 1 model of the world will fit ALL KNOWN true experimental facts.
I think there more or less enough facts, not enough thinking about them. We are adding facts and spending resources to add more without really knowing where to look.
As to gravitons and gravitational waves, Pioneer has measured/registered them.
As to source of Doppler shift, I have to think but for me it is not obvious yet that Universe is not expanding; It can be expanding, it can be of fixed size-depends on the stage it is in. I personally think it is still in expansion stage.
I think all the interactions there is can be experimentally verified by modeled with rotating water spheres. As Thomas Bohr has done with Platonic solids(or liquids, they are the same).
Thanks for Explanation. As a PROOF it would help to make something in a lab.
What I was thinking is that it is enough to THINK from the facts available today and decide what is the right model because most likely only 1 model of the world will fit ALL KNOWN true experimental facts.
I think there more or less enough facts, not enough thinking about them. We are adding facts and spending resources to add more without really knowing where to look.
As to gravitons and gravitational waves, Pioneer has measured/registered them.
As to source of Doppler shift, I have to think but for me it is not obvious yet that Universe is not expanding; It can be expanding, it can be of fixed size-depends on the stage it is in. I personally think it is still in expansion stage.
I think all the interactions there is can be experimentally verified by modeled with rotating water spheres. As Thomas Bohr has done with Platonic solids(or liquids, they are the same).
As to gravitons and gravitational waves, Pioneer has measured/registered them.
hi Ivars
I have never heard that.
according to the research of our institute GW has been never measured directly and will never be measured because they do not exists at all.
what was measured is change of speed of rotation of some stellar objects with preposition that the cause is gravitational radiation
i find that really weird and against empirical science spirit
here science is going away from the spirit of Galileo, Keppler, Newton,
it has become a "theoretical hocuspocus" where astronomical observations are explained with something that was never seen
about universe expanding (or not expanding) good source is home page of Roger Gouin
hi Ivars
I have never heard that.
according to the research of our institute GW has been never measured directly and will never be measured because they do not exists at all.
what was measured is change of speed of rotation of some stellar objects with preposition that the cause is gravitational radiation
i find that really weird and against empirical science spirit
here science is going away from the spirit of Galileo, Keppler, Newton,
it has become a "theoretical hocuspocus" where astronomical observations are explained with something that was never seen
about universe expanding (or not expanding) good source is home page of Roger Gouin
QUOTE (amrit+Sep 17 2006, 03:19 AM)
similar case is with gravitational waves
Only possible realistic GW could be transversal vector wave in linear domain and even that as a INCOMING part of linear GEM waves.
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
What I was thinking is that it is enough to THINK from the facts available today and decide what is the right model because most likely only 1 model of the world will fit ALL KNOWN true experimental facts.
Small contradiction with the above. Rather TO SEE. In fact it is an answer to Amrit's WHY - someone MUST to change his all presumptions, his "concepts" ie his "mind". To be like a child.
Hello, amrit
I also have not heard that. I have read that Pioneer has strayed a little bit from its calculated course.
From what I read I made my own conclusion that reason for this is interaction with gravitons as far as we call moving particles carrying acceleration m/s2 over distance m gravitons. This is just an insight. Lab in this case is quite big part of Solar system.
We can also call rotating strings which attach themselves to Pioneer and slows it down as it moves , a graviton field, or gravitation field.
In essence , particles and strings are just 2 parts of the same stuff. Wave-particle duality.
Actually, it does. All the time. Discrete time. In quanta. Propogated by waves. Until Earth is sucked up into Sun.
Only true knowledge is real power. We have only gibberish here so far. Therefore no power. But the right gibberish, one which will lead to knowledge via trial and failure.
Actually, it does. All the time. Discrete time. In quanta. Propogated by waves. Until Earth is sucked up into Sun.
amrit I must agree with Ivars on this point.
The sun is the source for earth.
Only possible realistic GW could be transversal vector wave in linear domain and even that as a INCOMING part of linear GEM waves.
QUOTE
As a PROOF it would help to make something in a lab.
Absolutely.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| As a PROOF it would help to make something in a lab. |
Absolutely.
What I was thinking is that it is enough to THINK from the facts available today and decide what is the right model because most likely only 1 model of the world will fit ALL KNOWN true experimental facts.
Small contradiction with the above. Rather TO SEE. In fact it is an answer to Amrit's WHY - someone MUST to change his all presumptions, his "concepts" ie his "mind". To be like a child.
QUOTE (Turya+Sep 16 2006, 10:21 PM)
Besides "massive gravyphoton" this would be of the highest degree of importance.
Sure, damned nice looking at me Bisto.....Ummmmm's
Sure, damned nice looking at me Bisto.....Ummmmm's
QUOTE (fivedoughnut+Sep 17 2006, 11:00 AM)
Sure, damned nice looking at me Bisto.....Ummmmm's
Bisto???
We're all born unique...why die a copy?
All the best to your further insights.
Bisto???
We're all born unique...why die a copy?
All the best to your further insights.
QUOTE
As to gravitons and gravitational waves, Pioneer has measured/registered them.
hi Ivars
I have never heard that.
hi Ivars
I have never heard that.
Hello, amrit
I also have not heard that. I have read that Pioneer has strayed a little bit from its calculated course.
From what I read I made my own conclusion that reason for this is interaction with gravitons as far as we call moving particles carrying acceleration m/s2 over distance m gravitons. This is just an insight. Lab in this case is quite big part of Solar system.
We can also call rotating strings which attach themselves to Pioneer and slows it down as it moves , a graviton field, or gravitation field.
In essence , particles and strings are just 2 parts of the same stuff. Wave-particle duality.
yes strings have a size of Planck and change their electrical charge from positive to negative in Planck time
this is so called "basic frequency" of "strings" or "quanta of space" that build up cosmic space
gravity is the result of the "density" of "strings" in the given volume of space
more matter more space is dense
density of space defines its curvature
gravity is carried by the "curvature-density" of space
let say by the "quantum structure of the space itself"
gravity is a non-propagating force from that point of view
no particle or wave moves from sun to earth in order to keep them together
GW are existing only in the scientific articles, only in the human mind
GW have no material existence
this is so called "basic frequency" of "strings" or "quanta of space" that build up cosmic space
gravity is the result of the "density" of "strings" in the given volume of space
more matter more space is dense
density of space defines its curvature
gravity is carried by the "curvature-density" of space
let say by the "quantum structure of the space itself"
gravity is a non-propagating force from that point of view
no particle or wave moves from sun to earth in order to keep them together
GW are existing only in the scientific articles, only in the human mind
GW have no material existence
this is all about a new paradigm guys
people in power (leading professors on important universities) have no understanding
and people with understanding (we) have no power
we can only "discuss" here
and that is all for now
people in power (leading professors on important universities) have no understanding
and people with understanding (we) have no power
we can only "discuss" here
and that is all for now
people which have science in their hands need to be less religious (dogmatic) and more empiric
YOU CAN NOT EXPLAİN A WİTH B UNTİL B WAS NOT OBSERVED EXPERİMENTALY
needs to be clear up.
YOU CAN NOT EXPLAİN A WİTH B UNTİL B WAS NOT OBSERVED EXPERİMENTALY
needs to be clear up.
Amrit
I agree with you.
Because I have chosen not to discard what I could prove, I listened to what was provable only. While experimenting, I had to accept failure, then I waited as I healed from this and the failure became knowledge for the next step.
I now know all failure is success in some form.
Now I use the failure to know I will soon see success.
I agree with you.
Because I have chosen not to discard what I could prove, I listened to what was provable only. While experimenting, I had to accept failure, then I waited as I healed from this and the failure became knowledge for the next step.
I now know all failure is success in some form.
Now I use the failure to know I will soon see success.
QUOTE
no particle or wave moves from sun to earth in order to keep them together
Actually, it does. All the time. Discrete time. In quanta. Propogated by waves. Until Earth is sucked up into Sun.
QUOTE
people in power (leading professors on important universities) have no understanding
and people with understanding (we) have no power
and people with understanding (we) have no power
Only true knowledge is real power. We have only gibberish here so far. Therefore no power. But the right gibberish, one which will lead to knowledge via trial and failure.
QUOTE (Ivars+Sep 18 2006, 07:18 PM)
Actually, it does. All the time. Discrete time. In quanta. Propogated by waves. Until Earth is sucked up into Sun.
amrit I must agree with Ivars on this point.
The sun is the source for earth.
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.