This message is brought to you by Androcles [Only registered users see links. ]
"Ralph Hertle" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message
news:[Only registered users see links. ]...
| Androcles wrote:
| > Which is why their speed is directly proportional to wavelength -
| > red and blue shift is routinely observed and Einstein's
| > crackpottery is not routinely observed or ever observed.
| If you are right please cite a study for the claim. My recollection
| doesn't produce a cite, and neither does my education.
Cite a study that never happened? How can I do that?
If you want a study of Doppler shift you can do that for yourself
by driving a vehicle past a sound source and listening carefully,
but nobody has studied:
'we establish by definition that the "time" required by
light to travel from A to B equals the "time" it requires
to travel from B to A' -- Idiot Albert Einstein
| Your help would be appreciated.
| A question:
| If the velocity of light is proportional to the wavelength wouldn't the
| frequency be the same for all light?
| The conservation of energy
| principle is operative.
| Wouldn't the frequency for all light be either 0 or 1 Hz?
No. The red H-alpha line at 656 nm has a frequency of 300,000,000/656 nm,
which is... well, you work the number out on your calculator, I can't be
If you are moving toward or away from the star (as we do every year for most
stars except the polar stars) then that frequency cannot change, but the
wavelength does. http://www.psi.edu/esp/doppler.jpg
However, the frequency you *measure* (if you could) would *appear* to