Re: OK, I'm Ready For the Patronizing Insults From the Resident Gurus!
From: Paul B. Andersen (paul.b.andersen_at_hia.no)
Date: 10/17/04
- Next message: eleaticus: "Re: Invariant Galilean Transformations (FAQ) On All Laws"
- Previous message: Paul B. Andersen: "Re: question about the red shift and the hubble constant"
- In reply to: Henri Wilson: "Re: OK, I'm Ready For the Patronizing Insults From the Resident Gurus!"
- Next in thread: Henri Wilson: "Re: OK, I'm Ready For the Patronizing Insults From the Resident Gurus!"
- Reply: Henri Wilson: "Re: OK, I'm Ready For the Patronizing Insults From the Resident Gurus!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 22:16:20 +0200
"Henri Wilson" <H@..> skrev i melding news:gij0n0hq27s4n0nupros0m3qrketkn4apq@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 13:03:31 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@hia.no>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Henri Wilson" <H@..> skrev i melding news:8mstm0tfgf3g9jp2eh87sku9n00jl90s66@4ax.com...
> >> On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 15:37:44 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@hia.no>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"Henri Wilson" wrote:
> >> >> On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 22:17:33 +0200, "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@hia.no>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >>
> >> >> >Of course there is a Doppler shift.
> >> >> >And of course the E = h.nu holds.
> >> >>
> >> >> How do you know that? I don't think it has ever been proved.
> >> >>
> >> >> >The absorbed power is (energy per photon) * (frequency of absorbed photons).
> >> >> >Both are Doppler shifted by sqrt((1+v/c)/(1-v/c)).
> >> >> >Thus the power will depend on the speed like (1+v/c)/(1-v/c)
> >> >> >
> >> >> >And you will arrive at the same result using Maxwell's equations.
> >> >> >(Which was what Einstein did in "Electrodynamics..")
> >> >>
> >> >> You will also arrive at the same result using NM.
> >> >>
> >> >> Just omit Einstein's concocted sqrt in the doppler equation, above.
> >> >
> >> >Sober up and read again, Henri.
> >> >I won't bother to point out your errors.
> >> >They are so obvious that you can find them yourself.
> >>
> >> I suppose I cannot win any argument that involves circular logic.
> >
> >Did we have an argument?
> >I told you what SR say about your question.
> >There is only one answer to that.
> >The one given above.
> >
> >And your claim:
> >"You will also arrive at the same result using NM"
> >is blazingly obvious wrong.
>
> Paul, is not "(1+v/c)/(1-v/c)" - {or (c+v)/(c-v)} - just the NM equation for
> doppler shift of sound in air? Does it not also apply to light in a medium?
No.
Paul
- Next message: eleaticus: "Re: Invariant Galilean Transformations (FAQ) On All Laws"
- Previous message: Paul B. Andersen: "Re: question about the red shift and the hubble constant"
- In reply to: Henri Wilson: "Re: OK, I'm Ready For the Patronizing Insults From the Resident Gurus!"
- Next in thread: Henri Wilson: "Re: OK, I'm Ready For the Patronizing Insults From the Resident Gurus!"
- Reply: Henri Wilson: "Re: OK, I'm Ready For the Patronizing Insults From the Resident Gurus!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
