SR predictions on an recent microwave experiement

  • Thread starter Thread starter lalbatros
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Microwave Sr
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on a recent IEEE paper claiming to invalidate Special Relativity's prediction of the transverse Doppler effect for microwaves through an experimental setup involving a rotating emission-reception system. The author of the paper did not detect a Doppler shift, leading to the conclusion that Special Relativity is incorrect. However, participants argue that the experiment's design, with a fixed source and detector, inherently precludes any expected Doppler shift. They emphasize that the wavefront behavior in the rotating system does not support the author's conclusions. Overall, the consensus is that the analysis presented in the paper is flawed and does not challenge established principles of Special Relativity.
lalbatros
Messages
1,247
Reaction score
2
I quickly read the followoing IEEE paper:

http://www.atomicprecision.com/blog/wp-filez/Thim%20-%20Absence%20of%20the%20relativistic%20Doppler%20effect%20...%20.pdf

The author claims he proved that he invalidated experimentally the SR prediction of a transverse Doppler effect for microwaves.
Its experimental setup is shown in figure 1.

Basically, an homodyne frequency-shift detection is used.
It involves a fixed source and a fixed detector.
The setup involves two paths: a "reference path" and an "active path".
In the active path, the microwave beam passes trough a rotating emission-reception system.
Because of the rotation of the beam within the "active path", the author claims a transverse Doppler effect should be observed.
The author did not detect any shift and concluded this invalidates SR.

I think this paper is totally wrong in its analysis and its conclusion. Experimental results are right but useless.
The source and the detector have no relative motion and therefore I would not expect ant Doppler shift.
In addition, if one considers a even simpler version of this experiment, the conclusion of "no Doppler shift expected" is even more obvious to me. This simplified version would be based on a cylindrical cavity in the "active path" whose walls would be rotating. It is clear that rotating walls would make any difference compared with fixed wall: reflexion on perfect conducting walls does not depend on the transverse motion.

I would like to elaborate on my first impression.
I am interrested by your own ideas and comments on this experiement as well as in the basic theory to analyse such experiments in general.

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi,

I did a quick analysis of this experiment one year ago, showing that SR predicts a null result, as measured. Sorry it's in German; in English: your first impression is right, emitter and source are at rest, that's it. What's happening between: the wavefront is blueshifted and tilted as seen by the rotating disk, and will be re-emitted blueshifted and tilted. No change happens.

I had a rather lengthy discussion with Prof. Thim via e-mail concerning another paper where he thought to show an inconsistency in the Lorentz Transforms. He emerged as a full scale crank, beyond any reasoning. Hard to believe that he was (is?) still teaching students at the University of Linz.
 
Moderator's note: Spin-off from another thread due to topic change. In the second link referenced, there is a claim about a physical interpretation of frame field. Consider a family of observers whose worldlines fill a region of spacetime. Each of them carries a clock and a set of mutually orthogonal rulers. Each observer points in the (timelike) direction defined by its worldline's tangent at any given event along it. What about the rulers each of them carries ? My interpretation: each...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
128
Views
34K
Replies
127
Views
27K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K