Symmetric Doppler Relation [Archive]

David Park

Nov28-04, 06:02 AM

v. guruprasad

Dec1-04, 11:07 AM

<jabberwocky><div class="vbmenu_control"><a href="jabberwocky:;" onClick="newWindow=window.open('','usenetCode','toolbar=no, location=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,status=no ,width=650,height=400'); newWindow.document.write('<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Usenet ASCII</TITLE></HEAD><BODY topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 BGCOLOR=#F1F1F1><table border=0 width=625><td bgcolor=midnightblue><font color=#F1F1F1>This Usenet message\'s original ASCII form: </font></td></tr><tr><td width=449><br><br><font face=courier><UL><PRE>"David Park" <djmp@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<p4aqd.7858\\$Ua.5965@newsread3.news.atl.eart hlink.net>...\n> (To Moderator: Sorry for reposting. I wanted to correct a spelling error.)\n>\n> " If two inertial observers exchange light signals they will observe the\n> same Doppler effect."\n>\n> This is sometimes used in special relativity derivations. I don\'t doubt it\n> but I wondered if there has ever been an experiment to directly test this\n> and perhaps put an upper limit on any deviation. What experimental evidence\n> could I cite for it?\n>\n> (I\'m not talking about symmetry of Doppler broadened spectral lines. I\'m\n> asking about the much simpler question of two observers in relative motion\n> exchanging light signals and measuring the Doppler shifts.)\n>\n> David Park\n> djmp@earthlink.net\n> http://home.earthlink.net/~djmp/\n\nThe usual perception of the Doppler effect is based simply on the\nbasic logic of the Doppler shift (like counting of wavecrests) and the\n(postulate of) constancy of c in SR. Most people take this to be\nsufficient for their needs and the issue of deviations does not seem\nto have been considered in the peer-reviewed literature. Note that a\nspectral deviation would be considered as measurement error or noise\nif did not show up consistently, so we would presumably want to\nexamine the case of systematic deviations if any. Such a deviation\ncould mean viewed as (a) a systematic error in our distance/velocity\nscales in the context where the deviation was observed, (b) a\nsystematic error in our theories predicting the distance/velocity\ndistributions in that context, or (c) a systematic spectrometric\nerror. Cases (a) and (b) are already involved in the contexts of the\ncosmological acceleration, the galactic rotation profile and the\nPioneer anomalous acceleration problems.\n\nIn gr-qc/0005014, Section II, I examined case (c) by applying the\nusual partial differential error sensitivity analysis to spectrometry,\nwith respect to the local reference frame units of scale. I withdrew\nit after acceptance by the editor of a peer-reviewed journal because I\nwas not satisfied with my articulation, and because it leads to\nspeculative physics out of step with mainstream thinking - the 3 step\nresult looks identical to an apparent linear expansion or contraction\nof the universe relative to the observer with the erroneous\nspectrometer, replete with an acceleration in the exact ratio as the\ncosmological. So please be warned it\'s unpublished in a peer-reviewed\njournal and got into arxiv.org before endorsements, so I can\'t even\nclean it up and fully deserve all the flames I\'ve got.\n\n\n-prasad.\n\n</UL></PRE></font></td></tr></table></BODY><HTML>');"> <IMG SRC=/images/buttons/ip.gif BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER ALT="View this Usenet post in original ASCII form">  View this Usenet post in original ASCII form </a></div><P></jabberwocky>"David Park" <djmp@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<p4aqd.7858$Ua.5965@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.ne t>...
> (To Moderator: Sorry for reposting. I wanted to correct a spelling error.)
>
> " If two inertial observers exchange light signals they will observe the
> same Doppler effect."
>
> This is sometimes used in special relativity derivations. I don't doubt it
> but I wondered if there has ever been an experiment to directly test this
> and perhaps put an upper limit on any deviation. What experimental evidence
> could I cite for it?
>
> (I'm not talking about symmetry of Doppler broadened spectral lines. I'm
> asking about the much simpler question of two observers in relative motion
> exchanging light signals and measuring the Doppler shifts.)
>
> David Park
> djmp@earthlink.net
> http://home.earthlink.net/~djmp/

The usual perception of the Doppler effect is based simply on the
basic logic of the Doppler shift (like counting of wavecrests) and the
(postulate of) constancy of c in SR. Most people take this to be
sufficient for their needs and the issue of deviations does not seem
to have been considered in the peer-reviewed literature. Note that a
spectral deviation would be considered as measurement error or noise
if did not show up consistently, so we would presumably want to
examine the case of systematic deviations if any. Such a deviation
could mean viewed as (a) a systematic error in our distance/velocity
scales in the context where the deviation was observed, (b) a
systematic error in our theories predicting the distance/velocity
distributions in that context, or (c) a systematic spectrometric
error. Cases (a) and (b) are already involved in the contexts of the
cosmological acceleration, the galactic rotation profile and the
Pioneer anomalous acceleration problems.

In http://www.arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0005014, Section II, I examined case (c) by applying the
usual partial differential error sensitivity analysis to spectrometry,
with respect to the local reference frame units of scale. I withdrew
it after acceptance by the editor of a peer-reviewed journal because I
was not satisfied with my articulation, and because it leads to
speculative physics out of step with mainstream thinking - the 3 step
result looks identical to an apparent linear expansion or contraction
of the universe relative to the observer with the erroneous
spectrometer, replete with an acceleration in the exact ratio as the
cosmological. So please be warned it's unpublished in a peer-reviewed
journal and got into arxiv.org before endorsements, so I can't even
clean it up and fully deserve all the flames I've got.

-prasad.