Doppler shift of a signal reflected in a mirror moving away from the observer.

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the relativistic Doppler shift of a signal reflected from a mirror moving away from an observer. The original poster derived the equation for frequency shift, f = f_0 (1-v/c)/(1+v/c), which aligns with the non-relativistic Doppler effect when the mirror is orthogonal to the direction of motion. The analysis confirms that length contraction and time dilation do not play a role in this specific scenario. The conclusion emphasizes the trivial nature of the result due to the symmetry of the situation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Doppler effect in physics
  • Familiarity with Lorentz transformations
  • Knowledge of special relativity concepts
  • Ability to manipulate algebraic equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of the Lorentz transformation on moving observers
  • Explore the non-relativistic Doppler effect in various contexts
  • Investigate the role of relativistic aberration in signal reflection
  • Review the mathematical derivation of the Doppler effect in special relativity
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of relativity, and anyone interested in the nuances of the Doppler effect and signal reflection in moving frames of reference.

yuiop
Messages
3,962
Reaction score
20
I have re-written this as as I accidently deleted my original post. I was wondering if the relativistic Doppler shift of a reflection from a mirror moving away from the observer was the same as the Newtonian equation in the special case that the mirror is orthogonal to the direction of motion.

I referred to equation (13) in this paper http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0409/0409014.pdf and set theta to zero for this special case.

I now think I have figured out the answer to my own question.

The equation I gave in my my first post:

f = f_0 \frac{1-2v/c+v^2/c^2}{1-v^2/c^2}

Can be re-arranged:

f = f_0 \frac{(1-v/c)(1-v/c)}{(1-v/c)(1+v/c)}

and simplified:

f = f_0 \frac{(1-v/c)}{(1+v/c)}

and this is exactly the same as the none relativistic equation for Doppler radar.

Length contraction and time dilation is not involved in this special case of reflection in a moving mirror.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, this is kind of a trivial result though. You can just move to the coordinates of the mirror and argue that because of symmetries (light beam coming in 90 degrees wrt the mirror), outgoing angle must be same as incoming angle.
 
clamtrox said:
Yes, this is kind of a trivial result though. You can just move to the coordinates of the mirror and argue that because of symmetries (light beam coming in 90 degrees wrt the mirror), outgoing angle must be same as incoming angle.

The question was not about angles but about red shift of a reflected signal. I chose the 90 degree angle wrt the mirror to eliminate complications due to relativistic aberration. I was inspired to ask the question because in another thread there was originally some doubt about whether time dilation or red shift are factors in the signal reflected from a mirror moving parallel to the observer. I am now fairly sure that they are not factors in that scenario.
 
yuiop said:
The question was not about angles but about red shift of a reflected signal. I chose the 90 degree angle wrt the mirror to eliminate complications due to relativistic aberration. I was inspired to ask the question because in another thread there was originally some doubt about whether time dilation or red shift are factors in the signal reflected from a mirror moving parallel to the observer. I am now fairly sure that they are not factors in that scenario.

So more explicitly (if you want to think in terms of length contractions), you get a relativistic correction because the Lorentz transform from mirror coordinates to observer coordinates changes the angle of the mirror. If the mirror is perpendicular to the beam, you can just trivially transform to mirror coordinates and you have a moving observer observing a beam (bouncing off a stationary mirror, but you know what happens there already).
 
clamtrox said:
So more explicitly (if you want to think in terms of length contractions), you get a relativistic correction because the Lorentz transform from mirror coordinates to observer coordinates changes the angle of the mirror. If the mirror is perpendicular to the beam, you can just trivially transform to mirror coordinates and you have a moving observer observing a beam (bouncing off a stationary mirror, but you know what happens there already).

Thanks, yes it helpful to think of it in that context. :smile:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
1K