Aberration of starlight due to

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

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the phenomenon of starlight aberration, specifically the 20+ arcseconds annual aberration and its explanation through special relativity (SR) versus classical mechanics. Participants explore historical measurements, theoretical predictions, and the potential for new measurements related to relativistic effects.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • HarryWertm questions how the annual aberration of starlight is explained by special relativity.
  • One participant provides a link to a historical overview of stellar aberration and relativity.
  • Another participant notes that the 20 arcseconds aberration was first measured and explained by James Bradley in 1729 using classical mechanics, asserting that SR does not change this result at the lowest order.
  • There is mention of a v^/c^2 correction term predicted by SR, which has been measured recently, though details are unclear.
  • A participant expresses confusion over the lack of information regarding recent measurements of the SR correction term related to aberration.
  • Another participant clarifies that the measurements they referred to were related to the relativistic transverse Doppler shift, not aberration, suggesting that the relativistic part of aberration may be too small to measure.
  • Discussion includes references to relativistic beaming and super-luminal motion of relativistic supernova jets as experimental observations, although some participants prefer to focus on historic measurements of starlight aberration.
  • Aharoni's work on SR predictions is mentioned, highlighting differences in the geometric projections of aberration compared to Bradley's classical approach.
  • There is a query about the differences in the minimal and maximal angles of aberration under SR and the feasibility of measuring these differences to find second-order corrections.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the role of special relativity in explaining starlight aberration, with some emphasizing classical mechanics and others advocating for the relevance of SR. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the existence and measurement of relativistic corrections to aberration.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in current measurements and the challenges in detecting small relativistic effects compared to classical predictions. There is also mention of unresolved parameters related to the shape of the figure of aberration unique to SR.

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.

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

That is approximately

[tex]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[/tex]

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
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · 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