Calculating relative velocity of Crab Nebula

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the relative velocity of the Crab Nebula using the Doppler formula. The initial calculation yielded a velocity of 3085.81 km/s, which was significantly higher than expected. A cosmologist advised using a modified formula that divides the result by two, leading to a more accurate velocity of 1542.90 km/s. This adjustment accounts for the difference between the approaching and receding filaments, with half the shift attributed to each. The participant expresses appreciation for the clarification, indicating a better understanding of the concept.
LavaLynne
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
I'm using the the Doppler formula to calculate the relative velocity between the approaching and receding filaments of the crab nebula: Δλ/λnaught = v/c Change in wavelength/ wavelength = velocity/ speed of light

I have reworked the formula as v= c(Δλ/λnaught)

When I plug in the values I get: 300,000 km/s (38.336 angstrom/ 3727 angstrom) = 3085.81

As this is nowhere near the velocity of the Crab's expansion I asked a cosmologist friend for help. He said that I should do the formula as: v= c(Δλ/λnaught) / 2

This gives me: 300,000 km/s (38.336 angstrom/ 3727 angstrom) /2 = 1542.90 km/s

Now this result is very close to the actual velocity of the expansion. What I'm wondering is...why am I dividing by two?

Keep in mind that I'm a mature student and this my first year of school in a very long time! Please go easy on me! :)
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
You're looking at the difference between approaching and receding filaments. Half that difference is assigned to the shift resulting from approach, and half to the shift due to recession.
 
Thank you very much for that! That make quite a lot of sense! :)
 
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
This hypothesis of scientists about the origin of the mysterious signal WOW seems plausible only on a superficial examination. In fact, such a strong coherent radiation requires a powerful initiating factor, and the hydrogen atoms in the cloud themselves must be in an overexcited state in order to respond instantly. If the density of the initiating radiation is insufficient, then the atoms of the cloud will not receive it at once, some will receive it earlier, and some later. But then there...
Back
Top