Aberration of starlight due to

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter HarryWertM
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Aberration
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the annual aberration of starlight, measured at 20 arcseconds, and its explanation through special relativity (SR). James Bradley first explained this phenomenon in 1729 using classical mechanics, and SR corroborates this result without altering it at the lowest order. The conversation highlights the need for recent measurements of the relativistic correction term predicted by SR, particularly in relation to the relativistic transverse Doppler shift and the unique shape of the figure of aberration in SR compared to Bradley's classical model. Participants express a desire for updated experimental data on these relativistic effects.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of special relativity principles and predictions
  • Familiarity with the historical context of stellar aberration
  • Knowledge of relativistic Doppler effects
  • Basic grasp of astronomical measurement techniques
NEXT STEPS
  • Research recent measurements of the relativistic transverse Doppler shift
  • Investigate the unique figure of aberration in special relativity
  • Explore the implications of relativistic beaming in astrophysics
  • Study J. Aharoni's "The Special Theory of Relativity" for detailed predictions
USEFUL FOR

Astronomers, physicists, and students of relativity interested in the experimental validation of relativistic effects and the historical context of stellar aberration measurements.

HarryWertM
Messages
99
Reaction score
0
Aberration of starlight due to...

I have read that the 20+ arcsec annual aberration of starlight is explained by special relativity, but I found no further comment.

So how is it explained in SR?
-HarryWertm
 
Physics news on Phys.org


The 20 arcsec was measured and explained in 1729 by James Bradley. The explanation used only classical mechanics and the known speed of light. SR does not change this to lowest order.
The advantage of SR was that it gave the same correct result as Bradley, while ether drag theories did not.
SR predicts a v^/c^2 correction term, which has been measured quite recently.
 


Does anyone know where to find more information regarding Meir's noted "quite recent" measurement of the SR correction term? Googled all over but found no mention of any such result.
 
Last edited:


I'm sorry. The measurements I mentioned were of the relativistic transverse Doppler shift. I don't know of any measurements of the relativistic part of aberration. I guess it is too small
 


Meir Achuz said:
I'm sorry. The measurements I mentioned were of the relativistic transverse Doppler shift. I don't know of any measurements of the relativistic part of aberration. I guess it is too small
Look up relativistic beaming or apparent super-luminal motion of relativistic supernova jets. It has been observed experimentally there.
 


It looks like the most detailed and rigorous text on SR predictions is J. Aharoni, "The Special Theory of Relativity" 1965

Aharoni made predictions in terms of the ratio of semi-axes of projected ellipse. They differ from the classical geometric Earth orbit projection of Bradley.

\alpha(min)/\alpha(max) = \alpha(l=-sin\phi)/\alpha(l=0)

That is approximately

cos\phi-[cos(\phi)sin(\phi)/2](v/c) + [cos(\phi)sin^2(\phi)/3](v/c)^2 -[cos(\phi)sin(\phi)(1/6+sin^2\phi/4](v/c)^3

plus higher order terms

Another unverified parameter is the shape of the figure of aberration which is unique for SR compared with the Bradley figure of aberration.
 
Last edited:


Look up relativistic beaming or apparent super-luminal motion of relativistic supernova jets. It has been observed experimentally there.

Would really prefer to know about new relativistic measurements of very historic phenomena like annual earth-orbital aberration of starlight rather than exotica like supernova jets.

the shape of the figure of aberration which is unique for SR

A bit puzzled by this. The maximal angle of aberration is slightly different for SR but isn't the minimal angle, and therefore minor axis of the elliptical "observation pattern", also different? And wouldn't the ratio of minimal and maximal axes be EXTREMELY slightly different for SR? Why not just measure the maximal angle of aberration as accurate as possible to attempt to find the second order SR correction? NASA budget too small or technology just not there yet?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
102
Views
11K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K