[geocentrism] dopp;er...
- From: "Philip" <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 16:51:50 +1000
I am not going to put my knowledge up agains a true scientist, Not that is
unless I think he be in error.
Steve said,
In sound you're dealing with
> pitch, in light you're dealing with spectral shift...two different things
Well I dont know about light exactly but if it is the same animal as RF
waves, then I have to say that the spectrum is made up of sinesoidal
frequencies, as is sound, even if square waves, which are really a mix of
sinesoidal harmonics and fundamental frequencies.
If there were to be any factors that would alter the mathmatics for
calculating doppler, I woild put up first, that the EMR waves are an
electrical phenonomen whereas sound is a mechanical one.
What ever the parameters surrounding the different forms are, it still
remains clear to me, that the basic principle as it pertains to the effect
of doppler are the same.
I meant to say the same thing to Mike or Alan in regard to their weak
response over my explanation of aberration. I posted the four main types of
aberration in optics/astronomy, and the only difference which gave them
their names was the application of the same principle of operation.
Philip.
Subject: [geocentrism] Fw: Re: Fw: Airy and the telescope...
Subject: Re: [geocentrism] Re: Fw: Airy and the telescope...
I would point out that if there were an aether, the doppler shift
> > formulae for light and sound would be the same. They're not!
> >
> > Alan
> So Alan,
> Are you saying that light is longitudinal? I could go for that...but I
don't
> think that you are :-) I mean let's talk apples to apples. Yes Doppler
> predicted that light might show the same "bunching up" as sound wave did
> when approaching a listener...that was a natural assumption in that day. I
> think you're speaking of the Doppler-Fizeau effect more exactly though. As
> far as the formula being different...I would only expect it to be, you're
> dealing with both different wave form as well as frequencies and in the
case
> of light from space, different mediums. At the speed that sound travels,
> though whatever the medium other than a vacuum, the difference between it
> and light are almost comical, the Doppler effect would barely be observed
> because of that...again...apples and oranges. In sound you're dealing with
> pitch, in light you're dealing with spectral shift...two different things
> Alan...I don't expect to see incoherent light cooking my food any more
than
> I would seeing it act like sound. Dopple made the erroneous assumption as
> well that all stars were white-light emitters with that light more or less
> being distributed across the spectrum. Today we know that that is not the
> case. All waves don't act the same. In fact...I'm glad you brought up the
> "Doppler effect." Seems that many objects seem to be leaving us....in any
> direction we look....but maybe Huggin's work would be a better place to
> start when dealing with what is or isn't moving towards us...
> Kindest regards,
> Steve
>
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Other related posts:
