How to detect rate of your time in Universe ?

When frequeny of light is higher then the wavelength is shorter and vice versa. I have no idea about its amplitude relations.

Light from most distant objects going away from us is red shifted, but its wave length should be shorter with respect to the wave length of same frequency light from a nonmoving object.

Hence by looking at the mismatch of frequency and wavelength we should be able to tell whether our local time is faster or slower than rest of that of the universe. Please blast me whereever I am wrong but with credible links.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I know all my threads are closed but I couldnt resist.

- Anomaly

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The amplitude is not affected - only the frequency (wavelength).

I don't quite follow you in the second paragraph because red-shifted IS a shorter wavelength.

Yes, you could compute the differences in time frames by the red (or blue) shift.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

So U mean no matter how much the frequency or wavelength varies the amplitude is unaffected by both.

I am asking whether that is the case how redshift is know to be redshift, whats the different between redshift and normal light of same wavelength ?

So why is it not possible to know general speeds of different parts of the universe with respect to eachother ?
I mean one must be the slowest and one fastest.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

That's correct. And there isn't a "both" - wavelength and frequency are simply two different ways of saying the exact same thing.

It's called "spectral analysis." Every element has precise spectral bands and it's very, very easy to see if those unique bands are shifted - and by how much they are shifted.

No one has said it isn't possible. I don't know where you got that. Yes, we can measure the speed of any visible star.

 

Thanks for clearing some things out.

I have yet not understood ;

Is it possible to create two lights with same wavelengths and amplitude but different frequencies ?

If not then things become very easy to understand about light from apporaching or departing sources.

 

No. If f is the frequency, L is the wavelength, and c is the speed of light then:
f L = c
Since c is always constant then if you increase f you decrease L and vice versa. You cannot change them independently.

Amplitude is unrelated and can be varied independently.

-Dale

 

Thanks James R, I was expecting U.

But U havent answered my Question.

Is it possible to create two lights with same frequencies and amplitude but different wavelengths ?

 

My poll vote:

None of the above.

 

So which poll option do U think I missed and why ?

 

Are U sure about this ? click the below link.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Is the wave getting compressed or is there a problem with the way humans measure it. It seems that light is faster than C and hence the same wave gives different readings. i.e. If the speed is more then we will count more waves in a shorter period and vice versa.

Did U see this comming ?

 

Honestly, no.

OK, Doppler effect. The Doppler effect arises precisely because of c = f L.

Your post is confusing to me because the tone sounds like you think you have a clever counterexample to me and JamesR. But then the effect you choose to mention actually requires c = f L (or its equivalent for sound). What's your point?

-Dale

 

Almost any informed physicist would agree with you James, but it does depend upon what you mean by "same medium." For example, is a ordinary solution of dextrous sugar, (or any optical active OR bi-refractive crystal like "Island Spar") the "same medium"?
For your answer to be true, you must answer: "NO - that single glass of sugar water is two different mediums."

Perhaps the sugar water example is not two different ones, but certainly some crystals are with the index of refraction dependent upon the orientation of incident polarization vector are for your reply to be strictly true.

 

So what happens if c is not constant but we never checked it properly.

Do U know of any major attempts to check for sure if speed of light is actually constant from an fast object going away, can tell me if U know about any such experiments.

There are many space craft that have sped away from earth so did anybody use them for the purpose or was the speed too slow to do any such measures ?

 

If light of wavelength X meters and frequency of Y cycles per second is emmited (hypothetical measurements). What is it that changes the frequency and wavelenght of that light for the incomming high speed object and exactly when the change occurs ?

 

Experimental observations would not match with relativity theory at some point.

I don't know of any such experiments, but they would not be nearly as sensitive as experiments done at CERN or any of the other high-energy particle accelerators. Particles have been accelerated well over .99 c with no measurable deviation from the constancy of c. If there is a frame-dependence of c it must be very small.

-Dale

 

U dont know of any ? Sorry but U do believe all that, dont U ?

Isnt that called blind faith ?

I apologize in advance but thats how it looks ?

 

"Anomalies r keys 2 discoveries"

Yes they are. Please provide some well supported anomalies that beg the question of the constancy of 'c' as opposed to the megatons of evidence supporting the constancy and frame independence of 'c'.

Try real hard.