Quote:
Originally Posted by renormalised
No, you chose one reply which was not based on anything to do with your initial and subsequent inquiries. Bojan stated that because he had no clue as to what the source of the original photon was, he couldn't measure anything other than its energy as registered on his equipment.
So, all you are trying to do here is pit one person's answer against another and try to make something of it.
My initial reply to your question was correct and is as correct as Bojan's. If you know the source of your photon, it's a simple matter of working backwards with the observation and using the appropriate redshift equations to give a redshift for that photon. And all you need is the photomulitplier tube (which will do the job, if you know how to convert the measured intensity to wavelength) to find the wavelength of the photon at detection.
Exactly the same way they read a redshifted spectrum.
If you can't understand that, then you shouldn't have asked the question in the first place.
Or, are you just out to cause arguments.
|
My you are all riled up. The original question started and ended thus
Quote:
Originally Posted by CraigS
Ok all you relativists out thar......
There is some flaw here, but where is it … ??...
Answerers welcome.
Cheers
|
Perhaps you are riled because the flaw in your postulate is that although you can measure the wavelength/frequency of the photon when it arrives, it is impossible to determine what the original wavelength/frequency of the photon was when it left the source, though you may speculate what it was.
Therefore you cannot determine the relative ages of photons X and Y
Giving facile or abusive responses tends to cloud the issue.
Gentlemen, Goodnight