Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.math > #639163 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Tobe Schuhmacher <hmomb@chsut.de> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2025-07-13 14:13 +0000 |
| Last post | 2025-07-14 08:22 +0200 |
| Articles | 5 — 4 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.math
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Relativism Killer Tobe Schuhmacher <hmomb@chsut.de> - 2025-07-13 14:13 +0000
Re: Relativism Killer Richard Hachel <rh@tiscali.fr> - 2025-07-13 15:21 +0000
Re: Relativism Killer Python <jp@python.invalid> - 2025-07-13 16:03 +0000
Re: Relativism Killer Richard Hachel <rh@tiscali.fr> - 2025-07-13 16:33 +0000
Re: Relativism Killer Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-07-14 08:22 +0200
| From | Tobe Schuhmacher <hmomb@chsut.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-07-13 14:13 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Relativism Killer |
| Message-ID | <1050etv$2q28d$1@dont-email.me> |
Richard Hachel wrote: > Le 13/07/2025 à 14:02, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit : >> Den 12.07.2025 20:25, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen: > >> According to SR, the longitudinal Doppler shift is: >> D = √((1 − v/c)/(1 + v/c)) >> where v is the relative speed source-observer. > > The word "longitudinal" is a bit misleading here. > We should simply refer to the Doppler effect without specifying > "longitudinal." > Indeed, there is an additional internal Doppler effect in the equation. > This internal Doppler effect is often replaced by the transverse Doppler > effect, a term that is also very misleading. > > R.H. light not travels transverse, my friend. If scattered that's reflection still longitudinal.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hachel <rh@tiscali.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-07-13 15:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <otKv1SuYIItx8HVWL76fsmsuqvM@jntp> |
| In reply to | #639163 |
Le 13/07/2025 à 16:13, Tobe Schuhmacher a écrit : > Richard Hachel wrote: > >> Le 13/07/2025 à 14:02, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit : >>> Den 12.07.2025 20:25, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen: >> >>> According to SR, the longitudinal Doppler shift is: >>> D = √((1 − v/c)/(1 + v/c)) >>> where v is the relative speed source-observer. >> >> The word "longitudinal" is a bit misleading here. >> We should simply refer to the Doppler effect without specifying >> "longitudinal." >> Indeed, there is an additional internal Doppler effect in the equation. >> This internal Doppler effect is often replaced by the transverse Doppler >> effect, a term that is also very misleading. >> >> R.H. > > light not travels transverse, my friend. If scattered that's reflection > still longitudinal. Absolutely. Il y a un effet Doppler longitudinal. Mais avec un effet Doppler interne associé. Simplement cette notion "interne" semble incompréhensible pour 80° des relativistes. R.H.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <jp@python.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-07-13 16:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <Fo9Us8PkkkdT-bSraOchV9lDKlU@jntp> |
| In reply to | #639164 |
Le 13/07/2025 à 17:21, Richard Hachel a écrit : > ... pour 80° des relativistes. 80° Celsius ou Fahrenheit ?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hachel <rh@tiscali.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-07-13 16:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <Gln1C9Of1Y26UxHAsvZUPTt-62Q@jntp> |
| In reply to | #639165 |
Le 13/07/2025 à 18:03, Python a écrit : > Le 13/07/2025 à 17:21, Richard Hachel a écrit : >> ... pour 80° des relativistes. > > 80° Celsius ou Fahrenheit ? Kelvin, évidemment. Soyons universel. R.H.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-07-14 08:22 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mdjlrgFmebmU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #639166 |
Am Sonntag000013, 13.07.2025 um 18:33 schrieb Richard Hachel: > Le 13/07/2025 à 18:03, Python a écrit : >> Le 13/07/2025 à 17:21, Richard Hachel a écrit : >>> ... pour 80° des relativistes. >> >> 80° Celsius ou Fahrenheit ? > > Kelvin, évidemment. > Soyons universel. > Most likely % was actually meant, not degree. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | sci.math
csiph-web