Light, Re-Emissions and Dr. Edward Dowdye - Classic Physics vs Relativity
Link to a video titled: Classic Physics vs Relativity- History, ...
The video explains many problems with relativity and its wrong treatment of light. At about 13 minutes the Doppler effect is questioned.
my comment to the post:
Until this video I thought my understanding of the Doppler effect and its blue and red shifts were strictly classical physics but after this video, maybe not.
If you have time, please consider an alternative for the radiation of light and the Doppler effect. Either I can contribute or I am wrong which could be helpful even then, by offering something to consider and explain away.
I disagree that the red or blue shift must occur during the repeated absorption and re-emission of the light. A red or blue shift usually occurs at the moment of light emission or absorption.
The absorption line red shift from hydrogen atoms in the inter galactic medium is definitely an absorption and re-emission. Other than that specific case, a re-emission is not involved.
This consistent re-emission is my main point of contention. I suppose my disagreement begins around 13:00 or so with a moving light source. The velocity of light is not changing but the wavelength distribution changes.
Sections 3 and 4 have the fundamental assumptions (in 3) and calculations (in 4).
Section 4 has acronyms for Emitted Wave Length, and New Wave Length which is the result of velocity z, both its sign and value.
The calculations are simple and found in many references.
The 2 scenarios are simple:
1) the light source is not moving,
2) the light source is moving.
The sight source is radiating a fixed amount of energy per wavelength. A maintained source repeats each wavelength being emitted, though in reality the radiated energy is usually a continuum of wave lengths, like from a star and its photosphere. An atom can emit one or more wave lengths depending on the element's electron configuration.
In the case of an atom changing to a lower energy state, a characteristic wave length EWL is emitted with that energy.
The frequency for a wave length is simply constant c divided by the wave length.
The energy being radiated is simply Planck's constant multiplied by the frequency.
Here is an image with 6 rays but the radiation is really a spherical continuum of energy from the source.
I believe this radiated sphere of a wavelength is similar to that described in the video.
However I probably interpret that sphere differently. From an atom as a light source there is only one sphere. The video suggests multiple spheres. That cannot always be the case.
Treating the simple image like a clock, there are rays at 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, and 11 o'clock.
With (1) or not moving this energy is uniform in all directions, so the same wavelength is emitted in all directions. This is like the video.
With (2) or moving this same energy is being emitted from source the but the wavelength is changing around the spherical continuum.
NWL is the New emitted Wave Length in a particular direction based on z at that point at the source in the continuum.
If the source is moving in direction 3 o'clock or 3o, then the NWL will be decreased (by negative z )because this ray is in the direction of travel. Wave lengths are shorter.
If the source is moving in direction 9o, then the NWL will be increased (by positive z) because this ray is in the opposite direction of travel. Wave lengths are longer.
The values will be the same at 3o and 9o but with opposite sign.
The z value and polarity varies around the spherical continuum.
The values at 5 o and 11o are opposites, and at 1o and 7o.
The energy being radiated from the light source is maintained regardless of direction of motion but the distribution of energy around the sphere of radiation has a smooth wave length variation in its distribution around the sphere.
An atom in space absorbing light from a distant source will perform the same pattern of absorbing a wavelength based on its velocity or kinetic energy and its direction relative to the light source, so in a similar manner the z varies in value and sign within the spherical continuum around this atom.
I suggest an emission line is not re-emitted to cause its blue or red shift in all cases.
I suggest an absorption line is not re-emitted to cause its blue or red shift in all cases. I also expect the velocity of the light source to have no effect on the propagation velocity because the source velocity affects the wavelength distribution NOT its velocity.
The critical observation. A quasar can capture a proton traveling toward it at a velocity multiples of c. The emission line from that new hydrogen atom is still observed though the light source is moving away faster than c.
This single observation shows the velocity of the light source has no effect on the velocity of light propagation..
I am quite curious whether we agree or where we disagree and how.