Jim Kelley wrote:
Michael Coslo wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:

Michael Coslo wrote:

All parts of any given galaxy are not moving toward or away from us
at the same speed, unless the galaxy is perfectly perpendicular to us.


True, but consider that the red shift frequencies
are discontinuous, i.e. quantized.

Is your red-shift issue about the red shift itself, or about the
magnitude of the shift? And if "variable seconds" is the culprit,
how are blue shifted stars accommodated in your model?


My issue is that red-shifts are not necessarily
100% Doppler effects.



Of course there is gravitational redshift too, but I don't think that
is what you are referring to.

I think you are trying to say that time is variable (forgive if I err)
This means that the speed of light is also variable if only by
relation to that variable time element

Doppler effect is readily observable at audio and RF wavelengths. It
is widely accepted that the effect continues at light wavelengths.

Any effects that alter Doppler at light wavelengths should also be
noticeable at to wavelengths. I have not heard of any such, have you?

This then says that we are not in the "fastest time" zone, because
there are celestial bodies that are blue shifting toward us, or
perhaps not,they are just in a different "time zone"? ;^)

BTW, I erred in my perpendicular statement above. I forgot about
transverse Doppler shift that we would indeed have in a galaxy at
right angles.

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

There is an interesting (hypothetical) effect - and maybe this is what
Cecil is talking about. Two systems; A and B, we're A. System B is
moving away from us at relativistic velocity. Sodium yellow light from
system B's street lights looks red from where we're standing in system
A. Lets say we can also measure the atomic transition frequency of the
sodium atoms in system B's street lights and discover that it resonates
at a lower frequency compared to our reference frame. [Note that if the
velocity between the two systems is indeed relativistic, then visible
light will be shifted down into the infrared. Also note that if we
could observe the diaphram of a car horn as it approached us, we would
see that its frequncy of oscillation visually would be higher than its
doppler shifted audible frequency.]

Here I become confused. It sounds as if you are saying that the
oscillation frequency of the "object" would be higher than the
frequency than the Doppler shifted frequency on approach. That sounds
like the reverse of the Doppler effect.


If we assume that sodium behaves
the same way everywhere in the universe (which we usually do) and it
transitions at universally the same frequency everywhere, measured with
respect to its own reference frame, then there must be a difference in
the length of the unit time between the two reference frames in order to
explain the apparent observed frequency difference. We usually assume
the Doppler effect is linear with velocity, but temporal effects are
assumed to increase very non-linearly as the speed of light is
approached. So at modest velocities the apparent shift would be all
doppler, but at relativistic velocities the temporal aspect would become
more significant. I believe this is one explanation for the apparent
'acceleration' effect, where you look far enough out and things appear
to be accelerating away from us, not just moving away.

Possibly. Cecil will eventually let us know. I'm still not completely sure.

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -