Traveling toward a light source

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by Thoreau, Jan 7, 2018.

  1. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,464
    Oh dear, I had not realised you were at daggers drawn with James.

    Sorry I mentioned it.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,074
    Just to be quite clear - I was referring to paddoboy re 'arsehole's revolting antics'. Hope that much was perefectly clear in context.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,464
    OK, understood. I'll leave the subject.

    Back to the topic, I did wonder myself whether the way time dilation works might mean that at some approach speeds very close to c the time dilation might dominate over the Doppler-type increase in apparent frequency of oscillation. Are you saying that is not the case?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,074
    For the head on case what I wrote in #13 (oops) was missing an additional factor (1+v/c) (where v is towards the target). Hence the net fractional frequency blueshift factor is
    γ(1+v/c), where as usual gamma factor γ = 1/√(1-v²/c²) is the inverse of Lorentz contraction factor. And always yields blueshift as both terms are > 1 for |v| > 0. It's properly set out in part 3 of the Wiki article I linked to in #13: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativistic_Doppler_effect#Motion_along_the_line_of_sight
    (note that the convention there is for v to be positive for receeding relative motion)
    Brian Greene had this much right in that NOVA special passage I linked to - every observed time dependent process is operated on equally by that factor. Hence uniform blueshift is guaranteed for all approaching v > 0.
    If however approach is other than head on there will be a diminished value. And in fact swings to redshift beyond a certain velocity dependent relative angle of approach. As set out under part 6: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativistic_Doppler_effect#Motion_in_an_arbitrary_direction
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2018
    exchemist likes this.
  8. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,703
    From one arsehole to another even bigger arsehole, ....
    You forget many things, and sidestep or make excuses for the rest. The most important of those things of course is that you are here...on a remote science forum, open to any fucking dickhead that feels like pushing any fucking god botherering agenda he likes. The second of course and even more obvious is that you are a totally unknown nobody in the science world, despite your claims and excuses to the contrary. You will always side step any suggestion of putting your ideas on paper and getting them professionally peer reviewed, whether that be that you claim you couldn't be bothered, or you havn't the time. And of course then we drag in the usual river/MR type conspiracy nonsense, re science being incalcitrant and not wanting to let go of Einstein's theories, and refusing to let you have a fair go.You certainly do though have the time to express your anger, your agression, your threats, your emotional out bursts, on this forum, to anyone that dare disaprove or disagree with your now obvious god driven agenda. Plus of course, as is the methodology of most with your baggage, expressing with all the utmost certainty of a looney how GR is wrong, and that you, your highness, are absolutely right. Perhaps you should have stayed "closeted" You agression does not stop with me....anyone that dare express any thoughts of Atheism or the nonsense that ID entails are also a target for your emotional wrath. Michael I see has had to also withstand your outburts.
    The closest poster on this forum that I see as aligning with your nuttery, fanaticism and pretentious agression is this Eugene Shubert nut and/or perhaps my old mate DMOE.
    Despite all those obvious "qualities" you have been correct on a couple of occasions...The state of this forum firstly, and secondly the inaction of James, not for offending your fucking ego, but for his lack of intestinal fortitude in not taking you to task. In private messages with me, James has more then once mentioned that I need to "back off" as the nonsense and anti GR stuff that the likes of yourself and the god [bless his cotton picking soul!] will never see the light of day, other then on this forum.So why should I really bother. On that issue and as I have already said, he is right. It also shows he is more interested in quantity, rather then quality.
    I see you as a "loner" qureeus, I don't believe you are married, or if you ever have been, I see that short lived due to your pretentious arrogant attitiude to anyone that dare cross your path...particularly if that interferes with your IDer concept. Again perhaps on that issue you should have remained closeted. You are in the US, correct? If that is so, I thank my fucking lucky stars that I do not live next door to you, particularly with the non-existent gun laws and your obvious emotional wrath and outburts. I'm in MAROUBRA by the way, a beach side suburb of Sydney. Interested?
    Before I sign off, let me say that I didn't and do not lurk here anymore...I actually got a PM from a person on the other forum I now frequent...you know, the one that you have literally begged me to disclose so you can stalk me even there? I'm prepared to disclose that now. It is over at SFN. Some pretty intelligent people over there, and I need not worry re the likes of your nutty emotional behaviour, as once displayed you would be warned, than banned if you continued.
    And of course your favourite "whipping boy" [other then myself, or Michael orDan perhaps, [ GR, is the gravitational theory of choice still. Like I said, and the point I will always rub in, your fucking outburst on this forum, impres nobody and in short time will be lost forever in cyber space. Still I suppose your spaghetti monster of choice, will continue to prompt you to continue with your evangelisitc crusade, under the banner of science, and in the hope that you will continue to fool people. Oh, did you notify Geene re his imaginary error that you picked up? Of course not! Lastly perhaps your bum boy may see the need to report this post and its message in the total fraud that you are. So be it....It may mark up a first for me, as unlike you, I haven't been banned from any forum as yet. You have a good day my dearest and sweetest, because I certainy will, knowing that you have, are and never will achieve anything like what your goal is.
     
  9. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,074
    My my. Thought you had done the right thing at last and left for good. Obviously been keenly looking in. Got enough f words and such out for a while? No don't bother answering. I'd expect just a string of more f words. Thanks for a signature posting though - filed away for future reference.
    PS: - Might have been useful to actually discuss the OP topic. Not that I'd expect top notch analytical insights mind you.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    exchemist likes this.
  10. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,074
    For some reason OP poster Thoreau hasn't chimed back in even with a like here or there. Oh well, I guess he/she got a satisfactory final answer.
     
  11. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,703
    Like I said, I don't chime in at all arsehole...A member there who is also here, informed me of your usual emotional outbursts and the one concerning me.You prefer the word arsehole to the word fuck I see. More hypocrisy
    In essence every thing I have hypothesised about yourself has been validated, more then once...seeya sweety!
     
  12. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,074
    I'm thinking, notwithstanding it's violating various forum rules, James would be rather pleased in a proxy way with your #25.
    Whether that's true or not - please DO now depart SF for good! And no I have no intention of 'stalking' you over at, whatever SFN stands for.
     
  13. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,703
    Of course! Its lack of rule enforcement and tolerance for non mainstream rubbish, leaves it as ideal for god botherering ID pushers such as yourself.
    And really, stop being so fucking pretentious. As I said, you would not get a look in over there, as with most reputable science forums, otherwise, my continued evidence for and support of GR, and the nonsense of any semblance of ID and IDers such as yourself, would have you stalking me with a vengeance! [as dictated by your spaghetti monster of choice]

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Have fun sweety, I have things to do and places to see.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  14. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    31,623
    Q-reeus:

    Like I said, your explanation was not very clear. In #4, I did not say you were wrong; I said you were "not quite right". As it turned out, I wasn't quite right, either. In #6, I simply pointed out a distinction that had also not been clear in your posts. This was how I read your prior posts at the time. Since then, obviously, the thread has moved on a bit.

    I didn't realise you'd be so touchy about somebody daring to question your great wisdom and obviously superior knowledge. I'll try to tread more softly on your vulnerable sensitivities next time.

    Indeed.

    I missed your own voluntary and begrudging concession to Janus58, too. Do you want to make a belated one, or are you intending to let that slide?

    I think you're making a mistake when you try to make everything a contest. No wonder you take it so hard when you perceive criticism, if you think like that.

    Are you accusing me of distorting something? Meh. As you say, the record is there for all to judge.

    This kind of thing sure does tend to reveal true personal character, just like you said.
     
  15. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    31,623
    If you want to know what I think, ask me. Don't assume.

    Also, you are free to report paddoboy's post if you wish. That's what the "report" button is for. A moderator will consider your report, if filed.
     
  16. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,074
    I'm through with to and frowing on this. Feel free to actually believe what you wrote there in #31 is in anyway accurate and fair. I never did respect your modus operandi style of throwing up, as a 'polished debunker', a series of superficially 'valid and incisive' questions that e.g. MR often rightly laughs off as junk tactics. Not that I by any means agree with everything MR puts out. It was that 'expert critic' style that so irked. Anyway, you have totally lost my respect as of this thread. Enough said!
     
  17. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    31,623
    You could have jumped in at any time in any of those threads to take issue with my "superficiality" and any questions that you thought were not actually "valid". MR needed all the help he could get, after all.

    I'm sure he'd appreciate your support on issues where you do agree with what he puts out.

    It strikes me that you have some kind of problem with "experts" or perceived "authorities". I think that, lacking a reason to criticise the content of my posts to MR, you instead find yourself having to cast around for reasons to instead criticise my "style".

    Of course, I could be wrong.

    I think you're a bit precious. You need to learn that it's OK to be wrong some times, and that often you can learn something when somebody questions you, even when you are right. You need to relax and not take questioning as some kind of personal attack on your character.
     
  18. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,074
    Could have? Here's some sample links as memory refresher (Won't waste time hunting for each individual posting by myself):
    http://www.sciforums.com/threads/10-principles-for-investigating-ufos.158542/
    http://www.sciforums.com/threads/portage-county-ravenna-ufo-chase-1966.158484/ (I come in p8 #157)
    Didn't always support MR!:
    http://www.sciforums.com/threads/early-report-ufo-australia.158519/
    http://www.sciforums.com/threads/fortean-phenomena.158279/ (I come in p11 #203.)
    See above. Over time one observes a monotonously familiar grab-bag of slogans, needlessly repetitive 'why would you' baiting questions, and similar tactics of shall we say the regular 'debunker/skeptic' crowd. A value judgement as to the worth of any regular involvement my part is called for. Decided it would be futile and frustrating and never go anywhere useful.
    The chief reason imo for that is ideological committment on the part of belligerents. Very, very few can ever rise above it. I characterize you as a classic gatekeepr type.
    See above.
    How very noble of you to allow for that - in principle - in theory.
    Too much irony imo in that one passage to be worth generating yet more 'go nowhere' exchange.
    Well, let's hope the OP does chime in to return this thread on-topic and give it maybe a semblance of a graceful end!
     
    Magical Realist likes this.
  19. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,074
    This is off-topic but given an undefined SFN was mentioned in #25 and some folks may be wondering what that is...
    A quick hunt online, and SFN turns out to be ScienceForums.net. And a bit more hunting turns up a beecee character:
    https://www.scienceforums.net/profile/74220-beecee/
    Evidently remained dormant there till migrating from other forums of recent times.

    Well guess what, small world - there's also a Q-reeus character there too:
    https://www.scienceforums.net/profile/47761-q-reeus/

    Turns out this Q-reeus character joined up earlier than the beecee character. But evidently chose to also remain dormant. Probably judging the traffic levels then were too glacial to bother contributing. Actually that was the reason. That dormancy status just might change anytime now on though.
     
  20. Michael 345 Bali tonight Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,514
    Arrrrh the power and the glory hallelujah hallelujah hallelujah of Iggy

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Why don't you mention how you really feel instead of keeping it bottled up like this

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Rock on

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  21. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,818
    Mod Note

    No no, please, tell us all how you really feel..

    This is completely unacceptable, by any standard of measure. What? Do you come here just to let rip because you can't pull this kind of macho bullshit on SFN?

    And basically giving your location after whining that someone is prone to outbursts and guns and whatnot, what the hell? What? Are you inviting him over as a threat? Or to show that your inner nerd is bigger than his? What, exactly is that even about?


    Said while chiming in..

    You have some anger issues. Perhaps you should speak to someone about it.
     
  22. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,818
    Mod Note

    This does not help either.

    Trolling like this is not acceptable.
     
  23. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,464
    I'm sorry it has come to this. Initially my fault, for a bit of ill-judged teasing of Q-reeus. Now it has all gone sour and brought Paddo out of the woodwork.
     

Share This Page