[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

*To*: T.L.G.vanderLinden@student.utwente.nl*Subject*: Re: Re: Doppler effect*From*: DotarSojat@aol.com*Date*: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 02:20:33 -0400*cc*: stevev@efn.org

Hello Timothy On 10/6 you wrote >...I only wonder why at 8/26 you mentioned and used both parts >of the Doppler effect while at 9/11 (to SD) you used only one >of both parts. On 8/26 I erroneously squared the Doppler relation to cover two effects, not realizing then that it already covered two effects within the one relation. All that is needed to cover both parts (per my 9/11 writeup) is Pr = Pe * sqrt[(1 - beta)/(1 + beta)] = Pe * exp(-theta) . I contend that, because we can derive Steve's result solely from consideration of the Doppler shift, you shouldn't have to worry about what property his analysis was based upon. Beyond saying the above, I don't know how to address your confusion. (Incidentally, I don't recall ever seeing the exponential relation for the Doppler shift before.) I think your question about "theta = a * t' " would have been quickly resolved if you had turned to my derivation of the "velocity-parameter equation of motion" ("VPEM") on pp 12-13 of your copy of my paper "An Engineering Review of Relativity for Interstellar Flight." I discussed the VPEM at some length in my letter of 3/26 to you, and I cited this portion of my paper to you in my letter of 4/21. (I wouldn't have expected you to have available a copy of the book "Spacetime Physics" by Taylor and Wheeler, where you'd find the VPEM on p 97; the book was pub- lished in 1966 and is probably long out of print.) Regards, Rex

- Prev by Date:
**Re: Doppler effect** - Next by Date:
**(Re:)^3 Doppler effect** - Prev by thread:
**Re: Doppler effect** - Next by thread:
**(Re:)^3 Doppler effect** - Index(es):