Solve Relativistic Doppler Effect for Wavelengths of Lights

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the relativistic Doppler effect, specifically analyzing the wavelengths of light observed from a spaceship moving towards and away from a stationary observer. The original poster presents a scenario with given wavelengths for both situations and seeks to determine the wavelengths of the lights emitted from the spaceship.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss various equations related to the Doppler effect and attempt to manipulate them to isolate variables. There are questions about the necessity of knowing the spaceship's velocity and whether it can be derived from the given information.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively exploring different methods to combine equations related to the wavelengths and velocities. Some suggest that isolating the velocity may complicate the problem, while others propose combining equations to eliminate the need for velocity altogether. There is no explicit consensus on the best approach yet.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the challenge of solving the problem without explicit velocity information and question the implications of light being emitted in different directions relative to the spaceship's motion.

Niles
Messages
1,834
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I am told that to a stationary observer, the lights infront of a spaceship has the wavelength = 480 nm when it arrives, and the lights in the back have wavelength 640 nm when the ship is moving away. Both lights (front and back) are the same.

I have to find the wavelength of the two lights.

The Attempt at a Solution


I have tried to use T = T_0 * (1+w/c)/sqrt(1-w^2/c^2) and from there use T-T_1 ... so the w's would go out, but they don't.

When the spaceship is arriving, the speed is v - when it is moving away, it is -v. From there, I tried the above.

How do I find the wavelengths? (I have to calculate relativistic).
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Is it possible to find it without using the velocity? (Because I am not told what it is)
 
Another thing, related to my first post, is: When the spaceship is arriving and the light is being sent forward - is there any change from that between when the spaceship is moving forward and the light is being emitted backwards?
 
Niles said:
I have tried to use T = T_0 * (1+w/c)/sqrt(1-w^2/c^2) and from there use T-T_1 ... so the w's would go out, but they don't.
This is an equation for period, which is 1/f. Express this in terms of wavelength by using [itex]\lambda = c/f = cT[/itex].

Now write both equations: one for an approaching source and one for a receding source.

Niles said:
Is it possible to find it without using the velocity? (Because I am not told what it is)
By combining the two equations, you'll be able to eliminate the velocity and solve for the source wavelength.

Niles said:
Another thing, related to my first post, is: When the spaceship is arriving and the light is being sent forward - is there any change from that between when the spaceship is moving forward and the light is being emitted backwards?
Nothing that's not already contained in the formula.
 
Hmm, it seems easier to solve for v first, and then for lambda?
 
If you combine the two equations correctly, you won't need to solve for v.
 
I have:

1) lamdba/480 = (1 + v/c)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)

2) lamdba/640 = (1 - v/c)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)

I isolated lamdbda, and inserted and found v. But I think I am meant to go the other way? Although it seems much harder
 
Niles said:
I have:

1) lamdba/480 = (1 + v/c)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)

2) lamdba/640 = (1 - v/c)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
Good.

I isolated lamdbda, and inserted and found v. But I think I am meant to go the other way? Although it seems much harder
Not sure what you mean. If you mean to solve for v, then plug it into the other equation to get lamdba... WAY too hard.

Hint: Think of clever ways of combining these two equations. (Think of the basic math operations.)
 
Doc Al said:
Good.


Not sure what you mean. If you mean to solve for v, then plug it into the other equation to get lamdba... WAY too hard.

:smile:

I can add them, so the v/c-part goes out, but the squareroot in the nominator can't? I tried subtracting, but that gave 2v/c, which doesn't seem much better.
 
  • #10
Good! So addition and subtraction don't seem to help. What's next? :wink:
 
  • #11
Ahh.. thanks Doc! :smile:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K