Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #363274 > unrolled thread

Relativity and SETI

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

Contents

  Relativity and SETI Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-09-06 20:59 +0000
    Re: Relativity and SETI rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 15:37 -0700
      Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2015-09-06 16:24 -0700
        Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 16:52 -0700
          Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2015-09-06 17:14 -0700
            Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 17:24 -0700
              Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2015-09-06 17:34 -0700
                Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 17:47 -0700
                  Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2015-09-06 18:26 -0700
                    Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 18:49 -0700
                      Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2015-09-06 19:53 -0700
                        Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 20:11 -0700
                          Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2015-09-06 20:41 -0700
                            Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 20:47 -0700
                              Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2015-09-06 20:49 -0700
                                Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 21:00 -0700
                                  Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2015-09-06 21:03 -0700
                                    Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 05:41 -0700
                                      Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2015-09-07 06:15 -0700
    Re: Relativity and SETI Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-09-06 18:53 -0500
    Re: Relativity and SETI Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 21:58 -0700

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#363274 — Relativity and SETI

Hello,

Let's assume that a distant intelligent source is broadcasting an amplitude
modulated signal at some frequency X.  Let's also assume that the source is
moving with respect to the earth.

The signal as received by the earth will be either red or blue shifted due
to the relativistic Doppler effect.  But how will the shifting affect the
modulation?

Same question, different form: Can a modulated signal be recovered unchanged
from a source that is Doppler shifted with respect to an observer?

 

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#363281

On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 4:58:54 PM UTC-4, Fabian Russell wrote:

> ... broadcasting an amplitude modulated signal at some frequency X.  
> Let's also assume that the source is moving with respect to the earth.
> 
> The signal as received by the earth will be either red or blue shifted due
> to the relativistic Doppler effect.  But how will the shifting affect the
> modulation?

It wont affect it, in the sense that both the carrier and modulation are "dilated" by the same factor. f_received = fo* Function_of_v; The amplitude is not Doppler affected.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#363285 — Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave

On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 3:37:21 PM UTC-7, rotchm wrote:
>  The amplitude is not Doppler affected.

Err, mainstream science says that you are full of shit, the amplitude transforms EXACTLY the same way as the frequency:

[tex]f'=f \gamma (1-\beta cos \theta)[/tex]

[tex]A'=A \gamma (1-\beta cos \theta)[/tex]

f=frequency
A=amplitude
\beta=v/c
\gamma=1/sqrt(1-\beta^2)

Find a different hobby, Stephane. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#363287 — Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave

On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 7:24:49 PM UTC-4, Dono, wrote:

Changing titles is out of topic and unprofessional. But we know of your ways.


> >  The amplitude is not Doppler affected.
> 
> Err, mainstream science says that you are full of shit, 

Not true. Show me one reference that says that.

> the amplitude transforms EXACTLY the same way as the frequency:
> [tex]f'=f \gamma (1-\beta cos \theta)[/tex]
> [tex]A'=A \gamma (1-\beta cos \theta)[/tex]

Perhaps I spoke too soon about the amplitudes. I will look into it. 
In the meanwhile, have you any references?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#363291 — Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave

On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 4:52:21 PM UTC-7, rotchm wrote:
> On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 7:24:49 PM UTC-4, Dono, wrote:
> 
> Changing titles is out of topic and unprofessional. But we know of your ways.
>

.... not if it exposes the fraud named Stephane Baune.

 
> 
> > >  The amplitude is not Doppler affected.
> > 
> > Err, mainstream science says that you are full of shit, 
> 
> Not true. Show me one reference that says that.
>

You are an autistic imbecile, you do not understand the meaning of the sentence. 

 
> > the amplitude transforms EXACTLY the same way as the frequency:
> > [tex]f'=f \gamma (1-\beta cos \theta)[/tex]
> > [tex]A'=A \gamma (1-\beta cos \theta)[/tex]
> 
> Perhaps I spoke too soon about the amplitudes. I will look into it. 
> In the meanwhile, have you any references?

Sure, try Einstein's paper , "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies".
Stephane,

It is clear that you are an ignorant, why do you feel compelled to embarrass yourself over and over? And I don't see your boyfriend, YBM, jumping in. Wonder why?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#363293 — Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave

On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 8:14:54 PM UTC-4, Dono, wrote:

> .... not if it exposes the fraud named Stephane Baune.

Out of topic. Are you that insecure about yourself that you need to change the topics and invent names?

> You are an autistic imbecile, 

Out of topic. And it is you who has a success rate of only 4% in physics...

> It is clear that you are an ignorant, 

Nope. I have a 96% success rate, where as you have 4%. Google kept a record. 

>  YBM, jumping in. 

Why do you invoke unrelated discussions. This post is about the transformations of amplitudes. Stay on topic. We all try to have a sensible discussions here, and all you have to offer is stupidity. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#363294 — Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave

On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 5:24:55 PM UTC-7, rotchm wrote:
> On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 8:14:54 PM UTC-4, Dono, wrote:
> 
> > .... not if it exposes the fraud named Stephane Baune.
> 
> Out of topic. Are you that insecure about yourself that you need to change the topics and invent names?
> 
> > You are an autistic imbecile, 
> 
> Out of topic. 

Not at all, you are a fraud. You've always been a fraud 

> 
> > It is clear that you are an ignorant, 
> 
> Nope. I have a 96% success rate, 

Delusional.


> 
> Why do you invoke unrelated discussions.

Because it is fun to point out that you ARE a fraud, Stephane.You've always been a fraud.



> This post is about the transformations of amplitudes. Stay on topic. 

You failed. Miserably. That's the topic. 


> We all try to have a sensible discussions here, and all you have to offer is stupidity.

Meh, deflating your ego is always fun. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#363296 — Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave

On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 8:34:12 PM UTC-4, Dono, wrote:
 
> Not at all, you are a fraud. You've always been a fraud 

Nope. You are just jealous... You cant handle the fact that I and others are way more knowledgeable than you and way more math literate than you. 

> > Nope. I have a 96% success rate, 
> 
> Delusional.

Google kept a record. 

> > This post is about the transformations of amplitudes. Stay on topic. 
> 
> You failed. Miserably. That's the topic. 

I poked way too soon in my reply to the op. It does happen, and I admit it. 

> Meh, deflating your ego is always fun.

Dont work, since my ego is well founded; I am great and have a 96% success rate. I do typo once in a while and I do blunder on very rare occasions, like in my reply to this thread. Although I should have known that the Amplitude is also affected, I understood why I replied as I did... and I learn from my blunder... Something you should learn to do, due to your overwhelming number of blunders (that you maintain, btw!). I am now better (thanks!) and thus better than you moreso now!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#363302 — Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave

On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 5:48:03 PM UTC-7, rotchm wrote:
> On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 8:34:12 PM UTC-4, Dono, wrote:
>  
> > Not at all, you are a fraud. You've always been a fraud 
> 
> Nope. You are just jealous...

I am not jealous of you, delusional idiot.

 
> 
> > > Nope. I have a 96% success rate, 
> > 
> > Delusional.
> 
> Google kept a record. 
> 

...of all your idiocies. Sure did. 


> > > This post is about the transformations of amplitudes. Stay on topic. 
> > 
> > You failed. Miserably. That's the topic. 
> 
> I poked way too soon in my reply to the op. It does happen, and I admit it. 
> 

You admit that you "poked"? Or you admit that you posted an idiocy? 


> > Meh, deflating your ego is always fun.
> 
> Dont work, since my ego is well founded; 

LOL, full of hot air

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#363307 — Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave

On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 9:26:31 PM UTC-4, Dono, wrote:
 
> > 
> > > > Nope. I have a 96% success rate, 
> > > 
> > > Delusional.
> > 
> > Google kept a record. 
> > 
> 
> ...of all your idiocies. Sure did. 

You mean, all of yours. My "oups" are rare. Yours are daily. I admit and learn from mine. You dont, and you maintain your errors. 

> You admit that you "poked"? 

? Nope. 


> Or you admit that you posted an idiocy? 

Nope. Its not an idiocy. Its a huge oversight on my part, a blunder, that I quickly acknowledged  and saw why I fell into it. An idiocy is something completely stupid and that is maintained... that is what you do, as google kept a record. Just like your latest idiocy where you claim/maintain that in the Bell's paradox, the ships distance is the same value in all reference frames; that it is "an invariant" ...  Deeply confused you are...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#363312 — Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave

On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 6:49:29 PM UTC-7, rotchm wrote:
> On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 9:26:31 PM UTC-4, Dono, wrote:
>  
> > > 
> > > > > Nope. I have a 96% success rate, 
> > > > 
> > > > Delusional.
> > > 
> > > Google kept a record. 
> > > 
> > 
> > ...of all your idiocies. Sure did. 
> 
 My "oups" are rare. 

You just posted an imbecility.


> > You admit that you "poked"? 
> 
> ? Nope. 
> 
> 
> > Or you admit that you posted an idiocy? 
> 
> Nope. Its not an idiocy. Its a huge oversight on my part, a blunder, that I quickly acknowledged  and saw why I fell into it. 

Good. No go and fuck yourself for a while. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#363316 — Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave

On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 10:53:31 PM UTC-4, Dono, wrote:
 
>  My "oups" are rare. 

You are in denial. Every week you make a huge one. Your latest (that I saw) was the Bell's spaceship paradox. 

> Good. No go and fuck yourself for a while.

Thats how you answer all the questions you cant solve. No wonder why you have a 4% score in physics. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#363323 — Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave

On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 8:11:18 PM UTC-7, rotchm wrote:
> On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 10:53:31 PM UTC-4, Dono, wrote:
>  
> >  My "oups" are rare. 
> 
> You are in denial. 

i cannot be in denial relative to YOUR errors. live with them , gassbag. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#363324 — Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave

On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 11:41:19 PM UTC-4, Dono, wrote:

> i cannot be in denial relative to YOUR errors. 

You are of yours though. Like the one you snipped again about the Bell's spaceship paradox... Are you able to acknowledge that you were wrong? That you learned from it?  Or do you maintain your imbecilities? Dont answer here... take it up in the appropriate thread. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#363326 — Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave

On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 8:48:04 PM UTC-7, rotchm wrote:
> On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 11:41:19 PM UTC-4, Dono, wrote:
> 
> > i cannot be in denial relative to YOUR errors. 
> 
> You are of yours though.

We are talking about YOUR latest imbecility in THIS thread, Stephane. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#363327 — Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave

On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 11:49:23 PM UTC-4, Dono, wrote:

> We are talking about YOUR latest imbecility in THIS thread, Stephane.

You mean yours. I did a blunder; you made and continued your imbecilities. 
Understand the difference?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#363328 — Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave

On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 9:00:49 PM UTC-7, rotchm wrote:
> On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 11:49:23 PM UTC-4, Dono, wrote:
> 
> > We are talking about YOUR latest imbecility in THIS thread, Stephane.
> 
>  I did a blunder; 

...meaning that you posted another one of your imbecilities, gassbag. Live with it. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#363342 — Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave

On Monday, September 7, 2015 at 12:03:19 AM UTC-4, Dono, wrote:

Here is what you snipped because you are so weak, you cant handle reality:


You mean yours [blunders]. I did a blunder; you made and continued your imbecilities. Understand the difference? 

Obviously you dont understand, hence your silence. Even when you are silenced, you still blunder in a major way... Then again, you are idiot dono!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#363344 — Re: Stephane Baune posts a new crankery, Einstein turns in his grave

On Monday, September 7, 2015 at 5:41:29 AM UTC-7, rotchm wrote:
> On Monday, September 7, 2015 at 12:03:19 AM UTC-4, Dono, wrote:
> 
> Here is what you snipped because you are so weak, you cant handle reality:
> 
> 
> You mean yours [blunders]. 

Yes, YOUR blunders, pretender. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#363289

On 9/6/15 9/6/15   3:59 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> Let's assume that a distant intelligent source is broadcasting an amplitude
> modulated signal at some frequency X.  Let's also assume that the source is
> moving with respect to the earth.

Hmmm. Amplitude modulation is one the worst ways to transfer information via a 
radio wave (OK, Morse code is worse :-)).


> The signal as received by the earth will be either red or blue shifted due
> to the relativistic Doppler effect.  But how will the shifting affect the
> modulation?

The modulation will be blue-/red-shifted by the same factor as the carrier 
itself. This is independent of the type of modulation.

The amplitude of the signal is also affected by the blue-/red-shifting, but by a 
different factor. For constant relative velocity, that factor is constant in 
time, so it does not affect the modulation (regardless of type).

	Of course the annual Doppler effect will apply. But astronomers
	always remove it, so this is a non-issue.


> Same question, different form: Can a modulated signal be recovered unchanged
> from a source that is Doppler shifted with respect to an observer?

If the source is unknown, it is not possible to determine either the original 
carrier frequency or the original modulation timing. But the modulation (any 
type) can be recovered from a blue-/red-shifted signal; its timing will be 
affected by the same factor as the carrier frequency (so it is not "unchanged", 
but is presumably intelligible).

	Signals from distant spacecraft are Doppler shifted, but
	their signals are routinely demodulated and understood.

Of course a signal identified as coming from intelligent life elsewhere in the 
cosmos would have its origin identified very quickly, which would permit 
reconstructing the original carrier frequency and modulation timing. Such a 
signal received on earth is most likely to come from "nearby", and thus have 
only a small Doppler shift (unless it comes from an invading force headed our 
way at high speed :-)).


Tom Roberts

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web