1. Light waves are moving at a constant speed in all directions in the
stationary ether as observed from the rest frame of the ether.
2. The observer and the source are also moving in the stationary ether.
These motions of the source and the observer in the statiionary ether are
called absolute motions.
3. Relative motion between the observer and the source is the vector
difference of their obsolute motions along the line joining them.
4. The direction of Relative motion will affect the rate arrival of light
waves from the source.
5. The direction of relative motion is dependent on the vectors of the
source and the observer.
6. This means that the rate of arrival of light waves (the speed of light)
to the observer is dependent on the absolute motions of the observer
and the source.
7 This is confirmed experimentally. If the observer or the source
accelerated he changed his state of absolute motion and he will see a
different Doppler shift of light than before he accelerated.

Ken Seto

"kenseto" wrote in message
...
1. Light waves are moving at a constant speed in all directions in the
stationary ether as observed from the rest frame of the ether.
2. The observer and the source are also moving in the stationary ether.
These motions of the source and the observer in the statiionary ether are
called absolute motions.
3. Relative motion between the observer and the source is the vector
difference of their obsolute motions along the line joining them.
4. The direction of Relative motion will affect the rate arrival of light
waves from the source.
5. The direction of relative motion is dependent on the vectors of the
source and the observer.
6. This means that the rate of arrival of light waves (the speed of light)
to the observer is dependent on the absolute motions of the observer
and the source.
7 This is confirmed experimentally. If the observer or the source
accelerated he changed his state of absolute motion and he will see a
different Doppler shift of light than before he accelerated.

Ken Seto
Doppler's equation for aether.
a) f' = f. (c+v)/(c-v)
Doppler's equation, Einstein's version.
b) f' = f. sqrt((1+v/c)/(1-v/c))
Doppler's equation, Androcles' version for interstellar space.
c) f' = f.(c+v)/c
Which one was confirmed experimentally?
a) ?
b) ?
c) ?
d) all of the above ?
e) none of the above ?

Scroll down for the answer...


















e) none of the above.
No experiment has been performed above atmosphere, and MMX didn't show any
shift below atmosphere.

Androcles

"Androcles" wrote in message ...

[snip]

Doppler's equation for aether.
a) f' = f. (c+v)/(c-v)
Doppler's equation, Einstein's version.
b) f' = f. sqrt((1+v/c)/(1-v/c))
Doppler's equation, Androcles' version for interstellar space.
c) f' = f.(c+v)/c

Absolutely brilliant.
When v = c the light won't reach us, so the maximal
observable ratio f'/f is 2.

Dirk Vdm

"Androcles" wrote in message
...

"kenseto" wrote in message
...
1. Light waves are moving at a constant speed in all directions in the
stationary ether as observed from the rest frame of the ether.
2. The observer and the source are also moving in the stationary ether.
These motions of the source and the observer in the statiionary ether
are
called absolute motions.
3. Relative motion between the observer and the source is the vector
difference of their obsolute motions along the line joining them.
4. The direction of Relative motion will affect the rate arrival of
light
waves from the source.
5. The direction of relative motion is dependent on the vectors of the
source and the observer.
6. This means that the rate of arrival of light waves (the speed of
light)
to the observer is dependent on the absolute motions of the observer
and the source.
7 This is confirmed experimentally. If the observer or the source
accelerated he changed his state of absolute motion and he will see a
different Doppler shift of light than before he accelerated.

Ken Seto
Doppler's equation for aether.
a) f' = f. (c+v)/(c-v)

This is NOT Doppler's equation for the aether.

Doppler's equation, Einstein's version.
b) f' = f. sqrt((1+v/c)/(1-v/c))

This is not complete.

Doppler's equation, Androcles' version for interstellar space.
c) f' = f.(c+v)/c

This is absurd.


Ken Seto

On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 11:26:57 +0000, Dirk Van de moortel wrote:


"Androcles" wrote in message ...

[snip]

Doppler's equation for aether.
a) f' = f. (c+v)/(c-v)
Doppler's equation, Einstein's version.
b) f' = f. sqrt((1+v/c)/(1-v/c))
Doppler's equation, Androcles' version for interstellar space.
c) f' = f.(c+v)/c

Absolutely brilliant.
When v = c the light won't reach us, so the maximal
observable ratio f'/f is 2.

Dirk Vdm

Do I detect a tiny little but of sarcasm, Dirk?

"Titan Point" wrote in message news
On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 11:26:57 +0000, Dirk Van de moortel wrote:


"Androcles" wrote in message ...

[snip]

Doppler's equation for aether.
a) f' = f. (c+v)/(c-v)
Doppler's equation, Einstein's version.
b) f' = f. sqrt((1+v/c)/(1-v/c))
Doppler's equation, Androcles' version for interstellar space.
c) f' = f.(c+v)/c

Absolutely brilliant.
When v = c the light won't reach us, so the maximal
observable ratio f'/f is 2.

Dirk Vdm

Do I detect a tiny little but of sarcasm, Dirk?

A tiny but indeed ;-)

Dirk Vdm

"Dirk Van de moortel" wrote in message ...
"Titan Point" wrote in message news
On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 11:26:57 +0000, Dirk Van de moortel wrote:


"Androcles" wrote in message ...

[snip]

Doppler's equation for aether.
a) f' = f. (c+v)/(c-v)
Doppler's equation, Einstein's version.
b) f' = f. sqrt((1+v/c)/(1-v/c))
Doppler's equation, Androcles' version for interstellar space.
c) f' = f.(c+v)/c

Absolutely brilliant.
When v = c the light won't reach us, so the maximal
observable ratio f'/f is 2.

Dirk Vdm

Do I detect a tiny little but of sarcasm, Dirk?

A tiny but indeed ;-)

Dirk Vdm

[EL]
Dirk, I know what you are thinking, but you must resist the
temptations.
You will never be a strong man if fall for every fumble that kisses
you on your cheek.
Resist dirk, resist.

EheheL

"kenseto" wrote in message
...

"Androcles" wrote in message
...

"kenseto" wrote in message
...
1. Light waves are moving at a constant speed in all directions in the
stationary ether as observed from the rest frame of the ether.
2. The observer and the source are also moving in the stationary
ether.
These motions of the source and the observer in the statiionary ether
are
called absolute motions.
3. Relative motion between the observer and the source is the vector
difference of their obsolute motions along the line joining them.
4. The direction of Relative motion will affect the rate arrival of
light
waves from the source.
5. The direction of relative motion is dependent on the vectors of the
source and the observer.
6. This means that the rate of arrival of light waves (the speed of
light)
to the observer is dependent on the absolute motions of the observer
and the source.
7 This is confirmed experimentally. If the observer or the source
accelerated he changed his state of absolute motion and he will see a
different Doppler shift of light than before he accelerated.

Ken Seto
Doppler's equation for aether.
a) f' = f. (c+v)/(c-v)

This is NOT Doppler's equation for the aether.
Oh, what is it then?
It is Doppler's equation for sound in air, why would it not be his equation
for
a light wave in aether?
Please enlighten us, oh wise one, with your profound wisdom and tell us what
it should be.

Doppler's equation, Einstein's version.
b) f' = f. sqrt((1+v/c)/(1-v/c))

This is not complete.
Isn't it?
Oh, unless you mean it should be f' = f. (1-cos(phi).v/c)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2),
I was setting phi to zero to simplify the motion to one axis, and not a
fly-by.
Y'know, that EEeeeee---ooOOOWWWWW noise a car makes as it passes
you, changing phi as it goes by...
Please enlighten us, oh wise one, with your profound wisdom and tell us what
it should be.

Doppler's equation, Androcles' version for interstellar space.
c) f' = f.(c+v)/c

This is absurd.
Is it? Well, I suppose it would be if you adopt the religion of
aetherialism.
Never mind, I won't ask you to explain it.
Just give us the equations you think should be used for relativity and
aetherilism. Oh, and remember that the frequency shift seen by MMX is
zero... Was that the shift you referred to as "confirmed experimentally"?
Androcles

"Titan Point" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 11:26:57 +0000, Dirk Van de moortel wrote:


"Androcles" wrote in message
...

[snip]

Doppler's equation for aether.
a) f' = f. (c+v)/(c-v)
Doppler's equation, Einstein's version.
b) f' = f. sqrt((1+v/c)/(1-v/c))
Doppler's equation, Androcles' version for interstellar space.
c) f' = f.(c+v)/c

Absolutely brilliant.
When v = c the light won't reach us, so the maximal
observable ratio f'/f is 2.

Dirk Vdm

Do I detect a tiny little but of sarcasm, Dirk?
Dinky's quite right, of course.
But then, with the redshift increasing the further away we peer into the
cosmos, from which it is presumed the universe is expanding, we wouldn't be
able to see any galaxies beyond that limit, would we? I wonder if it is
possible to detect what we cannot see? I'm sure Dinky can see what he cannot
see...
Androcles.

"Androcles" wrote in message
...

"kenseto" wrote in message
...

"Androcles" wrote in message
...

"kenseto" wrote in message
...
1. Light waves are moving at a constant speed in all directions in
the
stationary ether as observed from the rest frame of the ether.
2. The observer and the source are also moving in the stationary
ether.
These motions of the source and the observer in the statiionary
ether
are
called absolute motions.
3. Relative motion between the observer and the source is the vector
difference of their obsolute motions along the line joining them.
4. The direction of Relative motion will affect the rate arrival of
light
waves from the source.
5. The direction of relative motion is dependent on the vectors of
the
source and the observer.
6. This means that the rate of arrival of light waves (the speed of
light)
to the observer is dependent on the absolute motions of the observer
and the source.
7 This is confirmed experimentally. If the observer or the source
accelerated he changed his state of absolute motion and he will see
a
different Doppler shift of light than before he accelerated.

Ken Seto
Doppler's equation for aether.
a) f' = f. (c+v)/(c-v)

This is NOT Doppler's equation for the aether.
Oh, what is it then?
It is Doppler's equation for sound in air, why would it not be his
equation
for a light wave in aether?

Because air is not the same as the ether. The ether is elastic, structured
and
stationary. The structure of the ether can be deformed with the passage of
matter
particles. Light follows the deformed structure of the ether on its way to
the target.

Please enlighten us, oh wise one, with your profound wisdom and tell us
what
it should be.

The LET and SR equations are valid for use.

Doppler's equation, Einstein's version.
b) f' = f. sqrt((1+v/c)/(1-v/c))

This is not complete.
Isn't it?

It isn't because it just describe the case where the source is moving
towards
the observer. There is another equation that describes the source is moving
away
from the observer.

Oh, unless you mean it should be f' = f. (1-cos(phi).v/c)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2),
I was setting phi to zero to simplify the motion to one axis, and not a
fly-by.
Y'know, that EEeeeee---ooOOOWWWWW noise a car makes as it passes
you, changing phi as it goes by...
Please enlighten us, oh wise one, with your profound wisdom and tell us
what
it should be.

Doppler's equation, Androcles' version for interstellar space.
c) f' = f.(c+v)/c

This is absurd.
Is it? Well, I suppose it would be if you adopt the religion of
aetherialism.
Never mind, I won't ask you to explain it.

I did explain it above.

Just give us the equations you think should be used for relativity and
aetherilism. Oh, and remember that the frequency shift seen by MMX is
zero... Was that the shift you referred to as "confirmed experimentally"?

The null result of the MMX is due to the fact that the MMX is moving
vertically wrt the derfined horizontal light rays.

Ken Seto