Could the Cosmic Microwave Background Look Different from Other Vantage Points?

AI Thread Summary
The cosmic microwave background (CMB) would not appear significantly different from nearby vantage points like Pluto or a nearby star, as the change in perspective is minimal. To observe a noticeably different CMB skymap, a location approximately 10 million light-years away would be necessary. While the CMB does evolve over time, this evolution occurs at a rate too slow for human detection. The observable variations in temperature and structure are spread over vast distances, making significant changes only apparent from far-off locations. Overall, while the CMB can change with time and perspective, the differences are subtle and require considerable distance to become detectable.
starkind
Messages
182
Reaction score
0
I was looking at a map of the cosmic microwave background, and began wondering if the cmb would look the same from another vantage point, perhaps Pluto, or a nearby star. Or what about if it were seen from another galaxy? And, in a related question, does the cmb evolve with time?

I suppose no one knows. But has anyone done any speculation along these lines?

Thanks
 
Space news on Phys.org
it looks different from different locations of the Universe, but it order to have a different view you need to fly far away... Pluto, any nearby star or even Andromeda Galaxy are too close. You need to cross a significant part of the viible universe to see the difference.

From the same location, the picture becomes redder and redder and the picture slowly changes too.
 
starkind said:
I was looking at a map of the cosmic microwave background, and began wondering if the cmb would look the same from another vantage point, perhaps Pluto, or a nearby star. Or what about if it were seen from another galaxy? And, in a related question, does the cmb evolve with time?

I suppose no one knows. But has anyone done any speculation along these lines?

Thanks

The change in perspective would be too slight to make a detectable difference.
Even if you could jump to a nearby galaxy say 1 million LY away, it would still look the same.

Also there is time evolution but it is too slow for us to detect on a human-lifetime scale.

I should give some explanation so that it won't just be a flat assertion on my part. I don't know how much explanation you want though. The basic thing about perspective is that when we look at CMB we are observing matter which is in a spherical shell around us with radius 46 billion LY.

The detectable variations in temp, the blotches, are over scales of 10 million to a billion LY.
My hunch is that we'd need to jump to a vantage point some 10 million LY from here in order to get a noticeably different CMB skymap. Someone else may perhaps be able to refine that rough estimate.

As time goes on the spherical shell gets larger and it has a different slice of matter on it. The radius of the surface-of-last-scattering increases faster than just ordinary Hubblerate expansion. So it encompasses a fresh slice of matter, and maybe after 10 million years that matter would be sufficiently different to have detectable different blotches. So there would be time evolution, but on too slow a scale for us as we currently think.
 
thanks, Marcus and Dmitry67.
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
The formal paper is here. The Rutgers University news has published a story about an image being closely examined at their New Brunswick campus. Here is an excerpt: Computer modeling of the gravitational lens by Keeton and Eid showed that the four visible foreground galaxies causing the gravitational bending couldn’t explain the details of the five-image pattern. Only with the addition of a large, invisible mass, in this case, a dark matter halo, could the model match the observations...
Hi, I’m pretty new to cosmology and I’m trying to get my head around the Big Bang and the potential infinite extent of the universe as a whole. There’s lots of misleading info out there but this forum and a few others have helped me and I just wanted to check I have the right idea. The Big Bang was the creation of space and time. At this instant t=0 space was infinite in size but the scale factor was zero. I’m picturing it (hopefully correctly) like an excel spreadsheet with infinite...
Back
Top