What is the difference between the equations for Doppler effect and relativity?

Xeniebop
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Hello, I'm researching about relativity and Doppler effect, most text and book gives the equation for it as

586dcd8c3f118083cc846e9d7e0b9fd8.png
(term with square root is on the numerator, and the term w/o is on the denominator)


while on some text, has the reverse of the fraction part (which is the term with the square root is on the numerator

img107.gif


Are they both equal to each other? I can't seem to express/derive the other one from the other one.
Can you explain what are the difference in both equations.

thanks
 

Attachments

  • 586dcd8c3f118083cc846e9d7e0b9fd8.png
    586dcd8c3f118083cc846e9d7e0b9fd8.png
    785 bytes · Views: 387
  • img107.gif
    img107.gif
    917 bytes · Views: 418
Physics news on Phys.org
The two expressions differ in how the unit vector giving the direction of the EM wave is defined. Your first formula is for the direction in the source frame, and is used for stellar aberration. Your second formula defines the unit vector in the observer's frame, and is used for the Doppler effect. A good discussion of this is on page 456 of "Classical theory of Electric and Magnetic Fields" by Good and Nelson.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top