Absorption Line's Different Wavelengths

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
Sign up Log in
10 replies · 2K views
Atominate
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Hey Guys. If an absorption line of hydrogen was observed in the spectrum of the Galaxy, and it's wavelength was 494.9nm, and then the same line was found to be 490nm in the laboratory (in orbit around Earth), what could be drawn from that?
Thanks,
Atominate
 
Physics news on Phys.org
mfb said:
What do you think?
Is this homework?
I am doing a GCSE Astronomy course, but it's not for school. It is a long distance learning course, and this is a question on one of the assignments.

I know that the nm means the nanometers. From the nm of the absorption line, one can draw the temperature and radial velocity. To determine the velocity, one would:
(Observed Wavelength - True Wavelength) divided by the True Wavelength = v/c
(494.9 - 490) dived by 490 = 0.01
0.01 x 300000 (speed of light) = 3000
So we can say, that the Galaxy is blue shifted, and therefore coming towards us at a velocity of 3000 km/s?
 
I moved the thread to the homework section.

Does the wavelength get longer or shorter if the galaxy is moving towards us?

You might want to keep one more digit precision in the calculations.
 
mfb said:
I moved the thread to the homework section.
Does the wavelength get longer or shorter if the galaxy is moving towards us?
You might want to keep one more digit precision in the calculations.
Thanks for moving it to the more specific section. The wavelength would get shorter. What do you mean about the digit?
 
Atominate said:
The wavelength would get shorter.
But the wavelength you are given here gets longer.
Atominate said:
What do you mean about the digit?
Your rounding is quite imprecise.
 
I see, so the wavelength is increasing by 4.9nm meaning the Galaxy is moving away?

I've been told to consider the speed of light as 300,000km/s for this question. Is this what you mean about rounding?
 
Atominate said:
I see, so the wavelength is increasing by 4.9nm meaning the Galaxy is moving away?
Right.
Atominate said:
I've been told to consider the speed of light as 300,000km/s for this question. Is this what you mean about rounding?
No, that is fine. The 0.01 relative shift you calculated is imprecise. There is a huge difference between 0.005 and 0.0149 (a factor of 3!) but both would get rounded to 0.01 if you just keep two digits after the decimal point.
 
mfb said:
No, that is fine. The 0.01 relative shift you calculated is imprecise. There is a huge difference between 0.005 and 0.0149 (a factor of 3!) but both would get rounded to 0.01 if you just keep two digits after the decimal point.
I don't understand what you mean. I am not rounding any of the figures. Can you explain?
 
mfb said:
Ah I see, it happens to be "exactly" 0.01. I would still keep one more digit and write it as 0.010.
Okay. Thanks for your help.