81
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Is a photon positive, negative or neutral?
« on: 23/03/2016 05:32:45 »
Or something else?
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Now could you please tell me how, within the Pound Rebka experiment, a Doppler shift can be identified within the gravitational shift of light when there is no relative motion between the light source and the receiver other than the oscillations of the speaker cone... these oscillations of the speaker cone being the method of measuring the fact of the Doppler shift within the gravitational shift of light via cancellation of redshift blueshift frequencies...
Starting from the same basic mix of materials, lighter blobs (like Earth or Mars) could not hold onto lighter gases like hydrogen and helium, while heavier blobs (the Sun and gas giants) did hold onto the original hydrogen/helium-dominated composition.
It is assumed today that the Sun and all of the planets condensed out of a single protoplanetary disk, so they are all made from the same basic mix of elements.
I already understand his perspective. He's supposedly a chemist. When combustion is applied to fossil fuels, what is happening is that a tiny fraction of mass is being converted to a great deal of energy, according to the formula E-mc^2. Chemists don't worry about that.
I look forward to a proper physicists comments...
the gamma ray source moved
By vibrating the speaker cone the gamma ray source moved with varying speed, thus creating varying Doppler shifts. When the Doppler shift canceled out the gravitational blueshift, the receiving sample absorbed gamma rays and the number of gamma rays detected by the scintillation counter dropped accordingly. The variation in absorption could be correlated with the phase of the speaker vibration, hence with the speed of the emitting sample and therefore the Doppler shift.
Coal BTUs/yr 188,190,000,000,000,000 188 |
Oil BTUs/yr 187,573,685,712,000,000,000 187,574 |
Fossil BTUs |
Fossil BTUs per hour 21,434,004,076,712,300 21 |
Fossil BTUs per day 514,416,097,841,096,000 514 |
Fossil BTUs per year 187,761,875,712,000,000,000 187,762 |
Square feet on planet 5,490,383,247,360,000 |
Fossil BTUs per square foot per hour 3.9 |
Solar radiation |
BTUs per solar day 56,621,224,353,374,200,000 56,621 |
BTUs per solar year 20,666,746,888,981,600,000,000 20,666,747 |
Solar radiation 429.7 |
+ |
BTUs Solar & fossil fuel per day 57,135,640,451,215,300,000 57,136 |
2007 fossil percentage 0.90% |
2005 remaining coal 997,748 Million tons |
2007 rate of consumption 6,150 Million tons |
Years remaining at 2007 rate 162 |
2007 remaining oil 1,327,000 Million barrels |
2005 consumption rate 30,660 Million barrels |
Years remaining at 2005 rate 43 |
2005, 2007 baseline numbers for oil and coal consumption pulled from http://www.peaktoprairie.com/?D=188 |
The solar constant is defined as 429.7 Btu/sq. ft./hour, a ball of hydrogen that has a 12 year cycle isn't very constant, but somewhat predictable. |
In 2007 nearly 1 percent of the heat on earth came from fossil fuel. 2013 – 2014 when the sun shifts into it's hottest part of the 12 year cycle, it will be hotter! |
A wild guess 10% of the excess fossil heat was consumed by air conditioners relocating excess heat. Ahh the luxuries of being the one's heating the earth |
If I were a wise race of beings, I'd be saving that fuel for an ice age, when it was really needed, and hope it lasts. |
Yet - a Doppler shift cancelled the blueshift redshift frequencies between the 2 'static in motion' and 'constant in distance' locations... How did it do this?
Firstly, what an experiments intention is has no bearing on the use of its results.It wasn't the intention to show doppler shift occurs in static relative motion, nor was it shown. It showed that gravitational shift matched the predicted (expected) results.
You are forgetting that the Pound Rebka was initiated with a view to measuring gravitational shift with respect to time dilation considerations. The gravitational field itself experiences time dilation. It's not just a case of SR time dilation with regards to moving objects... you know!