Re: Redshift without expansion
- From: Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpeatmje@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 13:08:43 GMT
On a sunny day (29 Jun 2006 02:34:59 -0700) it happened "sean"
<jaymoseley@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
<1151573699.597704.139830@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
Jan Panteltje wrote:
Well, I am not endlessly going to try defend something I just did read,Yes thats sort of the way Ive read it too.
but think for a moment:
The changing electric field will generate a magnetic field 'further away',
theat in turn will generate an electric field even further away....
The electric and magnetic fields are 90 degrees out of phase.
So one 'vector' is rotating sin(w.t) and the other cos(w.t) where 'w'
is 2 x pi x f.
Now I say,... change that picture slightly. Instead of two rotating
fields, make it one. A combo flux/magnetic field. And its flux is
constant in that it does not oscillate in amplitude and only decreases
with brightness over distance.
Then, have that field rotate 360 at
right angles to direction of propogation so that the flux/mag rotates
sort of like a turning corkscrew looked at from the front .
Some remarks (call it reality check if you like), you know TV transmissions
are transmitted on UHF and VHF polarized (horizontal in Europe, maybe
vertical in the US?)
You do not see the TV antennas 'tilted' like this \ or this the further
away you are from a station.
You will find a maximum always at -- or | depending on the transmitter
polarization.
Then when
it hits any surface or filter lets say it gets polarized in that only
one angle of this rotating field is seen every cycle .
I think you should read up on electromagnetism, there are few mysteries
left on the polarization and frequency issue.
I did mention that we know the frequency received from a spacecraft
transmitter only depends on speed [Doppler], not on distance.
OK, we have not been really far out of the solar system...
But so far it holds.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Redshift without expansion
- From: sean
- Re: Redshift without expansion
- References:
- Redshift without expansion
- From: sean
- Re: Redshift without expansion
- From: sean
- Re: Redshift without expansion
- From: Jan Panteltje
- Re: Redshift without expansion
- From: sean
- Re: Redshift without expansion
- From: Jan Panteltje
- Re: Redshift without expansion
- From: sean
- Re: Redshift without expansion
- From: Jan Panteltje
- Re: Redshift without expansion
- From: sean
- Re: Redshift without expansion
- From: Jan Panteltje
- Re: Redshift without expansion
- From: William Hamblen
- Re: Redshift without expansion
- From: sean
- Re: Redshift without expansion
- From: Jan Panteltje
- Re: Redshift without expansion
- From: sean
- Redshift without expansion
- Prev by Date: Re: Redshift without expansion
- Next by Date: Re: Redshift without expansion
- Previous by thread: Re: Redshift without expansion
- Next by thread: Re: Redshift without expansion
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|