George Dishman wrote:
> (1) and (3) were stated by me, not Jeff.
I believe that Jim introduced the use of firearms into
discussion of the Doppler effect. Jim's description of
case (3) on February 22, which I quoted in my original
post and my web page containing the animation...
> Get a fast rifleman; have him fire at target while
> stationary, run quickly forward a few yards, stop and
> fire again--------repeat (he is a machine gun with the
> bullets fired when stationary.
> Will the observer at target note any effect to
> differentiate between that rifleman staying in the
> same place?????????
> (This clearly demonstrates that it is the MOTION of
> the gun at instant of firing which causes increased
> frequency/bullet velocity at target)
... is what prompted me to make the animation. I was
then further guided by Henry's canonization of the four
cases (1) through (4), which required me to reorganize
the animation to put the cases in the same order.
I wish Jim could comprehend the irony of his repeated,
strident complaints about the irrelevance of case (3),
when he is the person who suggested it.
It was actually first introduced by another poster a
few months ago, but Jim probably didn't remember that
when he wrote on February 22.
-- Jeff, in Minneapolis