> Bryan Olson wrote:

>> Paul Mays wrote:

>>> You are both correct so shake hands and come out fighting!

>> You lost me. I hold, I believe in agreement with Tom, that radar
>> reflected from a moving target is Doppler shifted from the
>> transmitted frequency, and the working of police radar is based on
>> that phenomenon. Robert claimed:
>>
>> � �Radar does not change frequency. �It is reflected from a target
>> � �at the same frequency it had before.
>>
>> We cannot both be right.

> All of the radar I worked on had a carrier wave at constant
> frequency.

> rbwinn wrote:

>> Bryan Olson wrote:

>>> Paul Mays wrote:

>>>> You are both correct so shake hands and come out fighting!

>>> You lost me. I hold, I believe in agreement with Tom, that radar
>>> reflected from a moving target is Doppler shifted from the
>>> transmitted frequency, and the working of police radar is based on
>>> that phenomenon. Robert claimed:

>

>>> � �Radar does not change frequency. �It is reflected from a target
>>> � �at the same frequency it had before.

>

>>> We cannot both be right.

>
> [...]
>

>> All of the radar I worked on had a carrier wave at constant
>> frequency.

> ...

> Bryan Olson wrote:

>> rbwinn wrote:

>>> All of the radar I worked on had a carrier wave at constant
>>> frequency.

>> You lost me, Robert. Is that a retraction? No one claimed, and no one
>> except possibly yourself implied, that you personally had background
>> that would require understanding of Doppler shift in...

> rbwinn wrote:

>> Bryan Olson wrote:

>>> rbwinn wrote:

>>>> All of the radar I worked on had a carrier wave at constant
>>>> frequency.

>>> You lost me, Robert. Is that a retraction? No one claimed, and no one
>>> except possibly yourself implied, that you personally had background
>>> that would require understanding of Doppler shift in radar reflection.

>

>>>> The carrier wave was modulated by the wave being reflected
>>>> from targets.

>>> Lost me again. I can see how that might be an attempt to describe
>>> something real, but there's not enough there to tell what.

>

>> Well, radar can be fairly complicated compared to relativity. �The
>> fact is that I never worked on the Doppler Radar, never saw any of the
>> books on it, etc., for a very simple reason. �The Aviation Electronics
>> Technicians took care of the Doppler Radar used for Air Control. �I
>> did take care of all of the radar repeaters in CCA where the Doppler ...

> What I am going to do is use sound to measure the doppler shift of light.
>
> This is the set up.
>
> S is a monochromatic light source, emitting light of frequency 7.5E14 hz (FL).

>In sci.physics.relativity, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson)
>
> wrote
>on Sun, 27 Apr 2008 01:06:41 GMT
>4ax.com>:

>> What I am going to do is use sound to measure the...

> On Sun, 4 May 2008 09:24:00 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine
> sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote:
>

>>In sci.physics.relativity, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson)
>>
>> wrote
>>on Sun, 27 Apr 2008 01:06:41 GMT
>>4ax.com>:

>>> What I am going to do is use sound to measure the doppler shift of light.
>>>
>>> This is the set up.
>>>
>>> S is a monochromatic light source, emitting light of frequency 7.5E14 hz (FL).

>>
>>Blue light; see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIE_1931_color_space . ...

>
>
>--
>This message is brought to you by Androcles
> http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
>
>"The Ghost In The Machine" sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in message
>news:uva2f5-gd9.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...

>| >>> Q) What is the colour of the light seen by an observer moving with the
>| >>> detector?
>| >>
>| >>The color of the light is 400 nm at rest, the gamma is 1+6.445*10^-11,
>| >>and the new wavelength...