Dear Colleagues,
Some time ago we published the paper
"On transverse Doppler effect in frames of classical formalism"
http://selftrans.narod.ru/v5_1/contents5rus.html#doppler
As a result of fruitful discussion (unfortunately, not on Google) we
decided to write a supplement. It explains the points which we retained
for the 'homework' of Readers, but it appeared that the inertia of
traditional mind prevented them to understand the meaning of those
points. Read and grasp:
http://selftrans.narod.ru/v5_1/doppler/supp/supp1/supp1.html
It is especially helpful for those who thinks Relativity perfect. ;-)
Sergey B. Karavashkin
Head Laboratory SELF
Olga N. Karavashkina
Assistant/Researcher
187 apt., 38 bldg.
Prospect Gagarina
Kharkov 61140
Ukraine
Phone: +38 (057) 73706624
e-mail: selftrans@yandex.ru , selflab@mail.ru
http://www.angelfire.com/la3/SELFlab/index.html
Uncle Al - 29 Jun 2005 22:34 GMT
> Dear Colleagues,
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> http://selftrans.narod.ru/v5_1/contents5rus.html#doppler
[snip]
If it isn't: given any achievable velocities V1 and V2 and any finite
lightspeed, the bound on the relative velocities of V1 and V2 as
viewed by any inertial observer cannot exceed
(V1 + V2)/[1 +(V1)(V2)/c^2]
This is transformation of velocities parallel to the direction of
motion. For velocities at an arbitrary angle theta, Jackson gives
u_parallel = (u'_parallel + v)/(1+(v dot u')/c^2)
u_perp = u'_perp/(gamma_v(1+(v dot u')/c^2))
<http://www.physics.umanitoba.ca/~souther/waves02/feb0402/sld011.htm>
Relativistic doppler shift,
http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s2-04/2-04.htm
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/reldop2.html
http://www.phys.ufl.edu/~rfield/PHY2061/images/chp39_2.pdf
then you are wrong. If it is, then you are redundant.

Signature
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf