Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!ut-sally!utastro!ethan
From: ethan@utastro.UUCP (Ethan Vishniac)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: Accelerating elevator
Message-ID: <1401@utastro.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 13-Nov-86 14:37:01 EST
Article-I.D.: utastro.1401
Posted: Thu Nov 13 14:37:01 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 13-Nov-86 23:04:52 EST
References: <1388@trwrb.UUCP> <546@mcgill-vision.UUCP> <1167@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> <5363@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Organization: U. Texas, Astronomy, Austin, TX
Lines: 18
Summary: not isotropic but still a blackbody

In article <5363@brl-smoke.ARPA>, gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn ) writes:
> In article <1167@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> myers@hobiecat.UUCP (Bob Myers) writes:
> >doppler shifted.  What does the distribution of radiation with wavelength
> >look like? Is it still a black-body curve?
> 
> This is harder to compute than it may first appear.
> I seem to recall that the answer is, no, isotropic
> black-body radiation does NOT look like isotropic
> black-body radiation with respect to a moving frame.

The radiation field still looks like a blackbody *in any given direction*
but a moving observer will see an angle dependent temperature.
-- 
"More Astronomy                Ethan Vishniac
 Less Sodomy"                  {charm,ut-sally,ut-ngp,noao}!utastro!ethan
  - from a poster seen         ethan@astro.AS.UTEXAS.EDU
    at an airport              Department of Astronomy
                               University of Texas