Gravitational Waves. oh really?

[Thief]

The speed of sound is constant. Look it up.


??? Not sure what you're getting at.


??? Still not sure what you're getting at.

Speed of sound is constant in a given medium and conditions. And putting a speaker in front of a train or in the back of it, the speed of the hearing sound is still constant. Only frequency and wavelength changes.

And the same goes for light.

That's how it works. That's how all experiments show.

the speed of sound seems constant to the engineer pulling the cord for the horn
to anyone not on the train.....it is as I described it

 

[Thief]

Huh?

And?

Therefore speed of light can change because your puke floats? Disgusting and completely irrelevant.

keep up with your puke.....you will understand

 

[Ouroboros]

the speed of sound seems constant to the engineer pulling the cord for the horn
to anyone not on the train.....it is as I described it

To anyone not on the train, the frequency has changed, yes, but not the speed.

 

[Ouroboros]

keep up with your puke.....you will understand

My puke? It was yours.

I'm done. You're just disgusting. I'm going to start ignoring you again.

 

[Thief]

To anyone not on the train, the frequency has changed, yes, but not the speed.

to anyone not on the train determining the pitch of the train's horn would have to be calculated.
speed would be a factor

 

[`mud]

I'm not sure what the winner gets ???
Whoooooooooooooossssssssssssss
~
'mud

 

[Ouroboros]

I'm not sure what the winner gets ???
Whoooooooooooooossssssssssssss
~
'mud

Anyone can look up doppler effect and see that velocity of sound and light doesn't change, but the frequency. Only the frequency and the wavelength changes because the velocity added or removed is essentially kinetic energy. Velocity is kinetic energy. Velocity is only one factor in the equation. And adding velocity is to add energy, which in the case of sound increasing its energy and the frequency, and the same for light. Therefore, as all experiments have shown since 1900 century, when it was first figured out (postulated), by Christian Doppler, that light shifted in frequency, not speed (1842). It was confirmed in sound (1845), and the same was finally confirmed in light (1848, electromagnetic waves, which are light, light is between 400 and 700 nm wavelength electromagnetic waves).

 

[`mud]

And the award goes to..............
~
'mud

 

[Thief]

Anyone can look up doppler effect and see that velocity of sound and light doesn't change, but the frequency. Only the frequency and the wavelength changes because the velocity added or removed is essentially kinetic energy. Velocity is kinetic energy. Velocity is only one factor in the equation. And adding velocity is to add energy, which in the case of sound increasing its energy and the frequency, and the same for light. Therefore, as all experiments have shown since 1900 century, when it was first figured out (postulated), by Christian Doppler, that light shifted in frequency, not speed (1842). It was confirmed in sound (1845), and the same was finally confirmed in light (1848, electromagnetic waves, which are light, light is between 400 and 700 nm wavelength electromagnetic waves).

frequency is a measurement.....wave length and speed

speed is relative as motion is relative.

 

[Ouroboros]

And the award goes to..............
~
'mud

Here's a link with a page that's pretty good: http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/doppler

Notice that the waves always travel at the same speed. The reason to doppler effect and frequency shifting is that the "uptake" or reception of the waves changes with the speed. So the actual wave speed is constant regardless of either objects moving, however, the frequency and wavelength changes with speed.

Here's another one: https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/doppler.html
See how the "f" changes (and with f, lambda/wavelength also changes, but is rarely mentioned, simply because the energy quanta doesn't change). They have no equation how the "v" (velocity) changes as a result of the moving source and target. Moving source or target, doesn't change v, but changes energy, and therefore frequency.

--- edit

You know, I'm taking classes for fun at the college that I work. And the class I'm taking is astronomy right now. And actually, today, the professor is going to go over doppler effect and red shift! LOL!. So... how about I ask him? (He got his PhD at the same university as Einstein, if I remember it right.)

---edit2

So I asked my professor, and he said "no". Speed doesn't change, and then he gave me a bunch of math to prove it. However, he said, the frequency and the wavelength changes.

Now, where did I hear that before? Oh, yeah! I said it! But this time, it came from a scientist (granted, through me, so you just have to trust me )

 

[Thief]

frequency is a measurement.....wave length and speed

speed is relative as motion is relative.

Here's a link with a page that's pretty good: http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/doppler

Notice that the waves always travel at the same speed. The reason to doppler effect and frequency shifting is that the "uptake" or reception of the waves changes with the speed. So the actual wave speed is constant regardless of either objects moving, however, the frequency and wavelength changes with speed.

Here's another one: https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/doppler.html
See how the "f" changes (and with f, lambda/wavelength also changes, but is rarely mentioned, simply because the energy quanta doesn't change). They have no equation how the "v" (velocity) changes as a result of the moving source and target. Moving source or target, doesn't change v, but changes energy, and therefore frequency.

I think you are confused.....and I understand.....

I suspect you cannot form the motion in your mind and rely on numbers.

 

[Ouroboros]

Funny thing. Continuation on the astronomy class. The teacher apparently knows the scientist who wrote a paper about warp drive.

Anyway, we also had our test on spectral lines and such, and how electron cloud radii relates to energy of photons, and more.

What was funny, was a question about speed of light, if it changed if a star was moving towards us in a fast speed or moving away. Does the speed change was one answer, the other answer was if the light blue and red shifted (frequency change). So we'll see next week if I "guessed" the right or wrong answer here.

 

[Thief]

Funny thing. Continuation on the astronomy class. The teacher apparently knows the scientist who wrote a paper about warp drive.

Anyway, we also had our test on spectral lines and such, and how electron cloud radii relates to energy of photons, and more.

What was funny, was a question about speed of light, if it changed if a star was moving towards us in a fast speed or moving away. Does the speed change was one answer, the other answer was if the light blue and red shifted (frequency change). So we'll see next week if I "guessed" the right or wrong answer here.

try for yourself....
if we were moving side by side at the sol.....you would not be able to see me.
if you were following me at the sol....I would not be able to see you
if we were head on at the sol.....we wont see each other til it's too late.
(2x the sol....btw)

 

[viole]

My point is that special relativity makes two contradictory claims.

ii) Time slows down for an object that approaches the velocity of light.

Nope. If that was true, then your time would also stop, considering that from the vantage point of the object, it is you who is traveling almost at the speed of light. There is no privileged point of view here.

So, if you travel in a starship almost at speed of light (relative to the earth), then you would not notice anything slowing down at all inside your starship. But if someone on earth could see how you are doing in your starship, he would see you moving in slow motion. The same if you could see how your earthling friend is doing. You would also see him moving in slow motion.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Revoltingest]

A useful site....
http://aether.lbl.gov/www/classes/p139/exp/gedanken.html
Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity is sometimes confusing. Here are a set of thought experiments that help to explain Special Relativity.

 

[`mud]

 

[Ouroboros]

A useful site....
http://aether.lbl.gov/www/classes/p139/exp/gedanken.html
Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity is sometimes confusing. Here are a set of thought experiments that help to explain Special Relativity.

Great site.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

Nope. If that was true, then your time would also stop, considering that from the vantage point of the object, it is you who is traveling almost at the speed of light. There is no privileged point of view here.

So, if you travel in a starship almost at speed of light (relative to the earth), then you would not notice anything slowing down at all inside your starship. But if someone on earth could see how you are doing in your starship, he would see you moving in slow motion. The same if you could see how your earthling friend is doing. You would also see him moving in slow motion.

Ciao

- viole

I am more than well aware of what the theory claims,
but its contradictory computationally for 3 bodies,

Consider the following scenario very carefully:

(and I mean think about it logically)
(like really really think)
(Like print it out and take a cup of coffee over it)

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

I am more than well aware of what the theory claims,
but its contradictory computationally for 3 bodies,

Consider the following scenario very carefully:

(and I mean think about it logically)
(like really really think)
(Like print it out and take a cup of coffee over it)

Special relativity is "special" because it holds for inertial reference frames. This example describes spaceships which "accelerate", and therefor special relativity doesn't even apply, let alone hold that the spaceships are "significantly affected by time dilation according to the principles of special relativity"

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

Special relativity is "special" because it holds for inertial reference frames. This example describes spaceships which "accelerate", and therefor special relativity doesn't even apply, let alone hold that the spaceships are "significantly affected by time dilation according to the principles of special relativity"

Then the spaceship can go faster than light if special relativity did not apply.