Does expanding space cause cosmological redshift?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the cause of cosmological redshift, specifically whether it is a result of the expansion of space or if it can be explained through local Minkowskian spacetime. Participants explore the implications of spacetime geometry on the behavior of light and the perception of redshift by observers.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that cosmological redshift is generally assumed to be due to space expansion, while others challenge this assumption, arguing it is derived from the spacetime geometry and the relationship of light rays to comoving observers.
  • One participant contends that in locally flat Minkowskian spacetime, the wavelength of photons should not change, while another counters that there is no independent notion of "photon wavelength" without considering the observer's perspective.
  • A participant introduces the idea that comoving observers in local Minkowski coordinates are not at relative rest and should experience a mutual redshift.
  • Another participant draws an analogy between local flatness and the curvature of the Earth, suggesting that while local flatness is an approximation, it does not negate the presence of redshift over larger distances.
  • It is noted that in an ideal FLRW universe, observers separated by large distances would see redshift, while those very close together would experience negligible redshift, highlighting the scale-dependent nature of cosmological effects.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between spacetime geometry and cosmological redshift, with no consensus reached on whether redshift is solely due to space expansion or if other factors are at play.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the limitations of local flatness as an approximation and the dependence on observer perspectives, indicating that the discussion involves unresolved assumptions about spacetime and redshift.

p78653
Messages
6
Reaction score
2
The cosmological redshift is generally assumed to be due to space expansion.

But if spacetime is locally flat Minkowskian then surely photon wavelength should not change?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
p78653 said:
The cosmological redshift is generally assumed to be due to space expansion.
No, it isn't "assumed" to be due to anything. It is calculated to be due to the spacetime geometry of the universe and the relationship of the worldlines of light rays to the worldlines of comoving observers.

p78653 said:
if spacetime is locally flat Minkowskian then surely photon wavelength should not change?
No, this is not correct. There is no such thing as "photon wavelength" independent of a particular observer measuring the photon, or more precisely "light ray" (since we are not talking about quantum physics here and "photon" is a quantum concept).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Klystron and PeroK
p78653 said:
But if spacetime is locally flat Minkowskian then surely photon wavelength should not change?
This statement is analogous to the claim that because the surface of the Earth is locally flat Euclidean great circle paths can't cross again. The key point is that "locally flat" is an approximation that is only exactly true over a region of zero size. Actually, curvature is negligible over a small region, but never totally absent.

In an ideal FLRW universe you and I could independently verify that we each see the CMB as isotropic. If we were megaparsecs apart then as soon as we could see each other we would be able to see redshift in each other. But if we were only a meter apart our redshift would be something like ##10^{-18}## - unmeasurably small. It'd be 140 million years before we were 1cm further apart (assuming us being over-dense can be neglected - in fact our gravitational attraction would overwhelm our expansion velocity on a timescale of fractions of a microsecond). It would be totally fine to ignore cosmological curvature over human time scales. Just as you don't bother accounting for the curvature of the Earth when you tile a floor, but you need to worry about it when planning a city.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: cianfa72, Klystron and Vanadium 50

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
482
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
861
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K