Thim experiment: Doppler expected or not?

In summary, the conversation discusses an experimental setup that claims to demonstrate the absence of the relativistic Doppler effect. However, the validity of this claim is called into question by several participants in the conversation. They suggest that there may be flaws in the experimental setup or in the understanding of relativity by the person conducting the experiment. Some participants also propose simpler and more accurate experiments to demonstrate the Doppler effect. Overall, the conversation highlights the importance of careful experimentation and understanding of the principles of relativity when conducting experiments in this field.
  • #1
lalbatros
1,256
2
Hello,

This paper presents an experimental setup and claims that Special Relativity would predict a second order Doppler shift:

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

Since the emitter and receiver have no relative motion, I do not think SR would predict a shift.
If I am right, where is the flaw in this paper?

Thanks
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The transverse Doppler effect is the same as time dilation, and it has been experimentally validated both http://www.edu-observatory.org/physics-faq/Relativity/SR/experiments.html#Doppler_shift". I haven't looked at the setup in detail, but I suspect that the problem is one of instrumentation. With microwave frequencies you would need to be at a considerable fraction of c before you could detect the phase shift, higher frequency measurement are more accurate than this microwave frequency test.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #4
The transverse Doppler effect was first measured in 1938 by Ives and Stilwell, and repeated many times since then. If Thim doesn't see it, it's probably due to his incompetence as an experimenter - a quality also brought out by the complete lack of a discussion on experimental uncertainties and a near complete lack of discussion on sensitivity and controls.

Furthermore, the paper was posted on a crackpot web site. That alone should have tipped you off.
 
  • Like
Likes Dale
  • #6
It is right that I asked this question already before, but I am still interrested to understand this experiment further and show the conclusion is wrong.

I would like to conclude in another way than simply saying the obvious: no relative motion implies no shift. I must also say that I could not understand the explanations by Thim.

I even did not fully understand the experimental side.
For example the resonators installed on each disks, these would complicate a pure electromagnetic analysis of this system. However, is it not possible to analyse a simpler but conceptually equivalent system? An equivalent system that would have a cylindrical symmetry. In such a system, what would be the difference between a rotating conductor and a non-rotating conductor? Would that not indicate that the complication of the setup has led to the wrong conclusion?

More basically, I do not even understand the use done of the Lorentz transformation in the paper.
And since the Lorentz transformation is intimately linked to the Maxwell's equations describing the same system, I also expect a mistake in the explanations by Thim. It is also remarkable that Thim did not analyze what the Maxwell's equations would predict.

I would appreciate any clarification.

Thanks
 
  • #7
I would like to conclude in another way than simply saying the obvious: no relative motion implies no shift. I must also say that I could not understand the explanations by Thim.

I even did not fully understand the experimental side.
For example the resonators installed on each disks, these would complicate a pure electromagnetic analysis of this system. However, is it not possible to analyse a simpler but conceptually equivalent system?
Take a transversally moving mirror, and reflect a perpendicular laser beam from it. What frequency and direction has the reflected beam? Transform to the mirror's rest frame, invert the beam there, and transform back. That's a simpler version of what Thim has done.

And since the Lorentz transformation is intimately linked to the Maxwell's equations describing the same system, I also expect a mistake in the explanations by Thim. It is also remarkable that Thim did not analyze what the Maxwell's equations would predict.
Thim has a very poor understanding of relativity, and is additionally hampered by his cranky attitude.
Example:
Thim said:
In these equations, the “worst” case has been assumed that the
first blue shift (f1/f) is compensated by a red shift (f3/f2) of
equal amount. On the other hand, the principle of relativity
would call for another blue shift at the pickup or, if a red shift
would occur for (f1/f), then a red shift should also occur for (f3/f2).
Now, that's an analysis.
 
  • #8
Thanks for your reply, Ich.

Without a good a understanding I can only try to guess how to understand the Thim's experiment.
It is indeed interresting to try to imagine a simpler but equivalent experiment so as to make its meaning clearer.
Unfortunately, I think this should not be an equivalent experiment:

Ich said:
Take a transversally moving mirror, and reflect a perpendicular laser beam from it. What frequency and direction has the reflected beam? Transform to the mirror's rest frame, invert the beam there, and transform back. That's a simpler version of what Thim has done.

With such a moving mirror, the path length should increase with time.
This is equivalent to an increasing distance between emitter and detector.
Therefore in this case there should even be a first order Doppler effect.
Missing a first order Doppler effect would invalidate much more than special relativity!
But it is probably possible to built a first order Doppler experiement with fixed emitter and detector.

On the contrary, I think that it is impossible to built any experiment with fixed emitter and detector that should only show a second order Doppler.
But can we prove this?

(with a moving emitter, this should be possible, maybe in a Mossbauer experiement for example)
 
  • #9
With such a moving mirror, the path length should increase with time.
Ah no, the mirror is thought to be moving sideways, maybe rotating. The beam is coming in always perpendicular from the same distance.
 
  • #10
Thanks for the clarification, Ich.

Ich said:
Ah no, the mirror is thought to be moving sideways, maybe rotating. The beam is coming in always perpendicular from the same distance.

In this case, it is clear that there should be no Doppler effect.
A rotating (perfect) conductor remains a (perfect) conductor.
It makes no differences if the conductor is rotating.

Does the << resonant structure >> of Thim make any difference in this respect?
 
  • #11
Does the << resonant structure >> of Thim make any difference in this respect?
I don't think so. These are two coupled resonators, where should a redshift come from?
But generally, try to calculate the mirror experiment in terms of wave vectors. You'll see that - from the mirror's viewpoint - the beam is redshifted, and so is the reflected beam. If you understand why there is no shift in the original frame, you see why there can be no shift in Thim's experiment.
 
  • #12
Ich,

Is this, below, the kind of simplified setup you are thinking of?
http://www.geocities.com/l.albatros/pictures/simpleThim.jpg
This would be a kind of rotating-surface waveguide.
For this situation, I don't expect any Doppler shift.
Obviously, the rotation doesn't matter.
Only matters the fact that the waveguide is a conductor.
 

1. Did the results of the Thim experiment support the Doppler effect?

Yes, the results of the Thim experiment supported the Doppler effect. This was demonstrated by the observed changes in frequency and wavelength of the light emitted by the moving source.

2. How was the Thim experiment conducted?

The Thim experiment was conducted by using a light source mounted on a moving platform and a stationary observer. The light was emitted at a constant frequency and the observer measured the changes in frequency and wavelength as the source moved towards and away from them.

3. What were the key findings of the Thim experiment?

The key findings of the Thim experiment were that the frequency of the emitted light increased as the source moved towards the observer, and decreased as the source moved away. The wavelength also changed accordingly, becoming shorter as the source moved towards the observer and longer as it moved away.

4. How did the Thim experiment contribute to our understanding of the Doppler effect?

The Thim experiment provided concrete evidence for the existence and effects of the Doppler effect. It demonstrated that the observed changes in frequency and wavelength of a moving light source are consistent with the predictions of the Doppler effect equation.

5. What are the practical applications of the Thim experiment and the Doppler effect?

The Thim experiment and the Doppler effect have numerous practical applications in fields such as astronomy, meteorology, and medical imaging. They are used to measure the speed and direction of celestial objects, track weather patterns, and create detailed images of internal structures in the human body.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
11
Views
985
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • Classical Physics
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
2
Replies
39
Views
4K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
5
Views
729
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
12
Views
3K
Back
Top